The catcher can help his pitcher by "sticking" the catch on borderline pitches. If he "jerks" a borderline pitch I figure he thinks it's a ball and he is trying to fool me, but everyone can see what he did, so I call it a ball. If he sets up outside and has to reach inside to catch one, or is set up inside and has to dive to the outside to catch one it's a ball. Strikes are easy to catch and should look easy.

At the higher levels you will get a lot of grief calling pitches strikes that the catcher did not easily catch. And if you call a borderline pitch a ball that popped out of the catcher's mitt, you will hear "you gotta catch that pitch" out of the dugout from the manager to his catcher.

I understand your perspectives, but I am really troubled by the idea of calling a STRIKE a ball to "speed the game up" (as I was bothered in a previous post to hear an umpire say to call a pitch a foot outside the plate a strike to "make the batter swing")
It is not our game to "speed up". It belongs to the players. If it takes three hours for a seven inning game then it takes three hours.
Our job as officials, whether baseball, hockey, or whatever other sports, is to make calls ACCURATELY and FAIRLY. Not to watch a pitch cross the plate as a strike but call it incorrectly "unless I need a strike" (UMPIRES never need strikes, PLAYERS do)
Just my two cents worth.

At the college or even varsity level, you call a pitch a strike in that situation, and you'll get crucified.

What I meant in the last part is this -- if the game is 24-1 and the losing pitcher throws this pitch, I may call it a strike regardless.

Gotta pretty much disagree with everything you said. Also, I must have missed the post about calling a pitch a foot outside a strike to make the batter swing. Please find this post and quote the source for us.

The game belongs to the players? Yeah, and a tie goes to the runner!:confused:

...for the physics perfessers out there.

How much can a pitched ball break from the front of the plate to the catchers mitt, say, 2 feet away? Understood fact: the ball will be travelling at its slowest velocity so it would be breaking at its greatest magnitude. Is it possible for a pitch, thrown overhand at a speed of, say, 60 mph, that needs to be blocked by a mitt touching the dirt, to be a strike given an 18" high batter's knee?

I'm not saying don't get the knee pitch nor am I saying call it where he catches it. Simply accept that we have a bad look at the low line of the zone and the coaches view is better. If the ball can't get to the catcher's knee then it was never a strike.

D

It's gotta be a strike THROUGH the zone which means it's gotta end up caught at or above the batter's knee for me to call it a strike. At any level. Anyone who calls pitches almost in the dirt strikes -- I guarantee your timing is a bit too quick and you're deciding on the pitch too early.

The zone goes to the hollow beneath the knee, at least in OBR and NCAA, and I call it that way, if the catcher "sticks" the catch. If he is dropping to his knees it's a ball because a pitch at the hollow is easily catchable.

Rich,

Have you ever umpired a pitcher with a very sharp 12 to 6 curveball, such as the one Barry Zito throws when he is on? I sure have, Barry Zito. He had a wicked nasty breaking ball as a HS pitcher. The ball could break down through the bottom of the strike zone, above the knee, and land in the dirt in front of the catcher. The pitches were absolutely solid strikes, yet by where they were caught looked like they were low. With most pitchers, they would have been low and called balls, but you just couldn't do that with Zito.

I would, all day long, if the catcher didn't move up and stick them.

You should be troubled, since your reading skills seem a bit degraded....no where in this thread does it say to call a pitch a foot outside the zone a strike to 'make anyone swing', and how does a ball in place of a strike 'speed the game up?' Would that not do the opposite? :rolleyes:

A time-honored technique to exaggerate/embellish previous posts so as to oppose a viewpoint that doesn't really exist....

L-Man -
Post #4 "unless I need a stike in that situation"
Post #6 "the batters haven't yet earned the right to be connoisseurs. Swing or sit."
Post #14 "let your gamess move along a lot smoother"
And my personal favorite, Post #13 where the strike zone moves depending on "your current level". I missed that page in my Fed book - in that one the strike zone is the same from 6th grade to Varsity

I accept your apology.

As to "foot outside" that was from a post a couple weeks ago.

My point was, YES we need to get younger players to swing the bat and pitchers to hit the plate. But if a batter has to "earn" the right to not swing at balls, we better be able to call that trapdoor curve a strike and spectators be damned. After all, my best friend on the field the CATCHER knew it was a strike to - and I've never seen a spectator or a rat come out and throw themselves in front of high close one to keep me from getting hit!

Thanks for listening and for the responses - this is a terrific group of professionals!

Please tell me you don't really think the strike zone is, or should be the same for 6th graders through varsity ball. Like it or not we hold the younger batters to a higher standard in regards to the strike zone, and the pitchers to a higher standard in upper levels of baseball. I would suggest that you discuss this with your association's senior members if you don't believe this and see what they say.


Tim.

I would never advocate calling a strike on a pitch a foot outside. If you give 'em more than 8 or 9 inches, coaches start to get suspicious. :D

BigUmp - yes, there's a bigger strike zone for a 6th grader - but once you determine it stick with it. Don't enlarge it when you need a strike.
Experience brings the place where you can make the call that keeps the batter and pitcher happy. The sense I was getting from the posts was that the zone can move depending on the situation in older levels. Changing Air Trainers to cleats and blue to jerseys with numbers on them, it's players jumping on US for calling outs at first in the seventh that were safe in the second inning.

But like I said, I truly appreciate this back and forth. It helps me.

ROTFL! Thanks for making my day, that's a rich one :) You should be Rumsfeld's new press agent ;)

Hmmm....a post a 'couple weeks ago' ...not in THIS thread: check.

"Make games move smoother" hmmm....has no bearing on calling a strike a ball: check.


If you call a zone as tight on 6th graders as you do in varsity as you say, you must be a hated man amongst the middle schools in your area....in fact, I'll chalk this intemperate statement to more exaggeration.

Nothing/no one you listed said anything about a foot outside or a ball instead of a strike speeds the game (as you said)...even after all this time to 'research' your answer.

My apology will stay in my pocket, thanks :D