Thread: Framing pitches
View Single Post
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 14, 2003, 12:27pm
Dave Hensley Dave Hensley is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 768
Re: Re: Framing the pitch

Quote:
Originally posted by SC Ump
A ball is a ball and a stike is a strike.
And on the bases, "if he's out he's out and if he's safe he's safe."

OK, case closed, question asked and answered, we can all go home now, fully trained in how to umpire.

Or, we can recognize that sometimes the calls aren't quite as easy as "a ball is a ball and a strike is a strike," and we can look to more advanced concepts in our approach to umpiring that will allow us to develop, hopefully, a level of consistency that gets us recognized as one of the better, rather than poorer, umpires around.

A concept that I have found very useful in reaching that objective is a set of logical guidelines for resolving the benefit of the doubt on close calls. When you make a call that is consistent with "the expected call" (i.e., the call everyone else expects you to make based on what happened), consistent with the principle of advantage/no advantage, that rewards the team that did their job and punishes the team that didn't, then you will find you'll encounter fewer arguments on the close ones, and you'll be in a superior position to defend your call in those arguments that do happen.

Bringing the "benefit of the doubt" concept to calling balls and strikes is easy and logical. Despite the simplictic lure of the "ball is a ball and strike is a strike" tautology, the truth is a borderline pitch may legitimately be called a ball or a strike, depending to a large degree on how the catcher handles (or butchers) it. Think about it - that fastball at the knees on the outside corner that the catcher sticks beautifully, out there in front of him, with no pulling, "framing" or presenting it perfectly for all to see, virtually calls itself. It's a strike.

That very same pitch, "butchered" by a less-skilled catcher - say he reacts late and ends up snagging it as it sails past his body, and then wildly pulls it back towards the zone - is NOT a strike, for several good reasons. It doesn't LOOK like a strike to the participants and spectators, and it doesn't deserve to be a strike because the catcher effed it up.

In addition to the corners, how the catcher handles the low pitch is crucially important to helping you establish a consistent, and respected strikezone at the knees. If he's set up properly, not too far back, and he knows to reach forward and catch that low pitch with his fingertips up, and then present that location for a beat so everyone including the umpire can see that it wasn't too low, then you can give him that call with little (if any) grief. If, on the other hand, the catcher is too far back, and/or turns his glove around and "scoops" that very same pitch off the dirt, then you'll likely be crucified (justifiably) if you call that pitch a strike.

Developing and applying these "benefit of the doubt" guidelines will make your game smoother, with fewer (or at least shorter) arguments and chirping on the close calls. The better coaches and players will understand and appreciate what you are doing and why, and the clueless coaches and players will piss and moan just like they always do, and they'll continue to lose. As it should be.

Reply With Quote