Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wmblue
I don't get the comment about the Gerry Davis stance, I assume that's an inside joke, however, he is not using the Gerry Davis stance, or at least not close to be being right.
The idea behind the Davis stance is to slide back, this umpire appears to be too close and also too low, if he was working higher, there's a better chance of seeing some of those pitches.
A lot of people especially in softball don't do the stance right, it is very easy to learn and whole lot easier to work.
I got marked down at the world series for it last year simply because the evaluators thought it was a "baseball" stance, which is too bad because before the tournament, they told everyone to go with what got them there, for me, that's the Davis stance.
I personally use it at all levels of softball and baseball, and, I'd encourage everyone to use it.
AP
|
It's not an "everyone" stance. Some people can use it well obviously. Most cannot. I've tried both and prefer the slot. The slot is obviously a better position for calling the game for most - or more professional level umpires would use Gerry Davis over the slot.
I would agree that ASA is a little anal about certain things like insisting on certain stances. I can understand enforcing the same mechanics on calls for uniformity sake or teaching the slot as a matter of course.. Someone working a different stance behind the catcher would not affect the way two umpires would work together (even if they came from 5000 miles away from each other). If someone prefers the Gerry Davis stance and works it well, it should not count against that umpire.
-- as to the op pic, I see an umpire with poor behind the plate mechanics who is neither using the Gerry Davis or slot.. just piss poor mechanics. In the 1st pic I can let him slide because its possible he was being crowded out. The 2nd pic seals the deal. There was plenty of room for a slot.
But who knows.. pics can be deceiving, but thats what I see.