|
tibear:
You're right I reacted to "who" made the post rather than talk to what was actually asked.
When an umpire criticizes the stance without ever using it it is disconcerting.
"From the picture provided, the angle from your eyes over the catcher is at best belt high. Assuming you're lined up on the inside corner how can you make the low outside corner call??"
This confuses me as most think GDS forces the umpire to work "higher" -- my opinion is that my eyes are basically just above the catchers head . . . when a cathcer work high I also work higher.
"It would appear that anything below the belt is in your blindspot because of the catcher. I setup exactly the same way you do but much closer to the catcher so I can see the strike zone."
There is no more of a blind spot working GDS as toe-to-instep. I would respectfully comment that even when you are closer to the catcher you cannot see the outside corner (famous Harry Wendelstat quote when told he couldn't see the outside corner: "I don't NEED to see it I know where it is!" -- that reference is only noting that all (except for the box) stances have "blind" spots.
Guys many of us now work the GDS and many of us are criticized even in our local area. It is my opinion that we are criticized "mostly" because we are doing something "different" and change is hard for some people to accept.
That is human nature.
And I apologize for the tone and words of my original post.
Regards,
"The Moron"
|