Strike zone

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by LDUB

Assistant coach from the dugout yells "Where the hell was that pitch at?!?!" I yelled back "Hey chief, that was up." Coach responds "That was the same height as the previous pitch." I screamed back "Yes you are correct, but the plate is longer right down the middle than on the inside corner. The pitch down the middle caught the top edge of the strike zone, but the pitch on the corner did not." Coach says back "Okay, sounds good to me."

39 words too many if you were talking to a real coach. 44 words too many if you were responding to an assistant.

[ggk]

well said, garth.

bullet or oval. i like both concepts but i lean towards the bullet, especially if the ball on the corner at the knees is well framed. a pitch that is high and in or out always looks like hell when a catcher tries to frame it.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Today I had a batter square to bunt, pulled the bat back way before the pitch arrived at the plate, and it was low, so I called "ball." The stupid coach, who was sitting in the closest part of the dugout to home plate asked, "He didn't offer at it, Blue?"

I said, "If he would have offered at it, I would have called it a strike, don't you think?"

The coach said nothing further.

[waltjp]

[QUOTE=DG]I must have had a good game today. Not one comment, from bench or fans, about any pitches.

And while we are on the subject of strike zone, how a catcher catches it is definitely a factor, as well as the age of the catcher, and the level of the game. I had one pitch about 2 inches above the knee, and right in the middle of the plate. It hit the catcher's mitt and went sideways about 15 feet. I did not say anything, I just turned and looked at the ball rolling away. The catcher tells his pitcher "that's me, that's me" and no one says a word. This was college players playing with wood bats in the summer, and at that level a catcher should be able to catch a strike.
[QUOTE]

I had the bases in an adult summer league game last week. The catcher for one of the teams was having a hard time holding on to pitches. At one point, after having three consecutive pitches pop out of his glove the SS yells in, "It's like a ketchup bottle! You have to squeeze it!!!"

[Tim C]

I think discussions of a strike zone begin to define umpiring.

Calling balls and strikes is a mixture between art and science.

It would be impossible for an umpire of quality to call the rule book strike zone. Curve balls that catch the front knee and then bounce short of the catcher cannot, in reality, be called strikes. It is not even an "unwritten rule" it is simple fact.

Umpires that advance to higher level baseball (as played by shaving aged players) learn to call balls and strikes that move a game along both quickly and fairly.

We know that how umpires call the plate defines you as an umpire at all levels. Those "great" base umpires have a good time HOWEVER great plate umpires advance up the chain.

As noted previously in this thread my strike zone is in the shape of an egg. That does not mean that it ends in a point it simply means that high inside/outside pitches and low inside/outside pitches are judged with a little stronger detail.

That is all it means.

This FED season my plate games average less than 1:30 -- while baeball is not played by the clock I think this shows that I move games along with good game managment skills and I call STRIKES.

I often intone the following:

"With the exception of Eric Gregg (RIP) I have never seen an umpire get in trouble for calling too many strikes."

Umpires with conviction call strikes and outs --

While this thread is a wonderful experience in seeing the difference between rule book strikes and real world strikes there is one thing missing:

I don't care how you define a strike. Just make sure that you call each pitch consistently and there will seldom be any problems.

Regards,

[johnnyg08]

Well said Tim C. Calling strikes and balls is not as black and white as the rule book. It truly is an art and a skill that develops over time with good coaching and self evaluation. listening to coaches in a dugout or fans in the stands will only get a young umpire in trouble.

[buckweat]

Very nice post Tim!

I certainly agree that “It would be impossible for a “human” umpire of quality to call the rule book strike zone”. There’s no human on the face of the earth that has the ability to make all the mental calculations necessary to call a pitch correctly and accurately in the amount of time given, and at he same time completely ignore the rest of the world. That’s why its called “judgment”.

However, just because we humans can’t do it, doesn’t mean its impossible, rather that its acceptable. ;-)

You’re also correct that the “experience” of seeing the differences between theory and reality in threads like this is pretty neat. It only adds to the knowledge base. No one is really right or wrong, but they should at least have the courage of their convictions and remain open to other possibilities.

[David B]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I think discussions of a strike zone begin to define umpiring.

Calling balls and strikes is a mixture between art and science.

It would be impossible for an umpire of quality to call the rule book strike zone. Curve balls that catch the front knee and then bounce short of the catcher cannot, in reality, be called strikes. It is not even an "unwritten rule" it is simple fact.

Umpires that advance to higher level baseball (as played by shaving aged players) learn to call balls and strikes that move a game along both quickly and fairly.

We know that how umpires call the plate defines you as an umpire at all levels. Those "great" base umpires have a good time HOWEVER great plate umpires advance up the chain.

As noted previously in this thread my strike zone is in the shape of an egg. That does not mean that it ends in a point it simply means that high inside/outside pitches and low inside/outside pitches are judged with a little stronger detail.

That is all it means.

This FED season my plate games average less than 1:30 -- while baeball is not played by the clock I think this shows that I move games along with good game managment skills and I call STRIKES.

I often intone the following:

"With the exception of Eric Gregg (see other thread) I have never seen an umpire get in trouble for calling too many strikes."

Umpires with conviction call strikes and outs --

While this thread is a wonderful experience in seeing the difference between rule book strikes and real world strikes there is one thing missing:

I don't care how you define a strike. Just make sure that you call each pitch consistently and there will seldom be any problems.

Regards,

This is a great post especially for a young umpire trying to move up the chain.

Strikes do make a difference in an umpire - and I'm not talking about the union etc.,

Thansk
David

[TussAgee11]

As a young umpire, I enjoyed your post Tim. Just a few thoughts:

I don't have much of a problem staying consistent WITHIN a game. But I do have problems from game to game, even if the same league and teams are playing. Doubleheaders, with me on the plate for both games, would make me nervous for this reason.

An example: I had a game yesterday, 15 year old REC league, both pitchers were extremely good. Threw hard, and accurate. I took away the top of the zone a little bit, and was strict on the corners. Now if those pitchers had no clue how to pitch, I would have gone the other way.

This is basic umpiring, but I have a hard time determining which way I need to go before the game starts. And once it starts, I feel like I'm locked into that zone. Its hard to gradually change it without anyone taking exception (including myself).

Thoughts?

[nickrego]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

As a young umpire, I enjoyed your post Tim. Just a few thoughts:

I don't have much of a problem staying consistent WITHIN a game. But I do have problems from game to game, even if the same league and teams are playing.

Thoughts?

Game to game has nothing to do with it.

It's Pitcher to Pitcher, and even more importantly, Catcher to Catcher.

A Catcher that doesn't know what they are doing, can rob the best pitcher from getting the called strike.

When you feel like your having trouble with consistency, the first thing you do is check your own head. If nothing is in there but the game, no family or work issues, then look to the catcher. He/she is probably working in a way the makes it difficult to be consistent.

If the Catcher is doing a good job, once you have learned how a good Catcher looks, you probably have a Pitcher that is struggling. If they're not hitting there spots, throwing a lot of wild pitches, it is difficult.

The good news is, time will help you out with this.

[nickrego]

The Micky Mouse Zone !

A 3-D Rectangle over the plate, with a mouse ear on each of the 4 corners.

Great for getting a slow moving game over with !

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Curve balls that catch the front knee and then bounce short of the catcher cannot, in reality, be called strikes. It is not even an "unwritten rule" it is simple fact.

,

First, how many pitchers have good enough stuff to actually catch the strike zone and then break to the dirt in front of the catcher?
Second, if he did have that good of stuff why wouldn't you call it?

it's got nothing to do with the quality of the catcher everything to do with the quality of the pitch.
If a pitch is in the strike zone and breaks to the ankles catcher picks it clean, it seems to me that only fear of the offensive coach prevents the strike call.

So the simple fact is, you're saying out of fear you would not call a strike on a ball you admit hit the strike zone?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by NIump50

First, how many pitchers have good enough stuff to actually catch the strike zone and then break to the dirt in front of the catcher?
Second, if he did have that good of stuff why wouldn't you call it?

it's got nothing to do with the quality of the catcher everything to do with the quality of the pitch.
If a pitch is in the strike zone and breaks to the ankles catcher picks it clean, it seems to me that only fear of the offensive coach prevents the strike call.

So the simple fact is, you're saying out of fear you would not call a strike on a ball you admit hit the strike zone?

You don't know Tee very well if you think he's afraid of anything.

Perception is everything. If everyone in the park but you thinks a pitch is low, maybe you ought to change your perception.

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

You don't know Tee very well if you think he's afraid of anything.

Perception is everything. If everyone in the park but you thinks a pitch is low, maybe you ought to change your perception.

Nothing to do with perception. He said a ball that catches the knee(i'm assuming over the plate) and then breaks to the dirt cannot be called a strike.
Are you suggesting we poll the audience before we make our calls?
I thought the ol umpire slogan was 'I call em the way I see em'

If everyone in the park thinks the hands are part of the bat, do I make my call based on there opinion?
If everyone in the park thinks a tie goes to the runner, do I make my call accordingly?
If everyone in the park thinks a foul tip is a foul ball should I rule foul ball?
I think you get my point.
Why should a pitch judged by you to have crossed the strike zone and picked cleanly by the catcher be called anything but a strike?
All things being equal, if you see a strike and call a ball you're a coward.

[Tim C]

I now know all I need to know about your umpire ability, the level of baseball you work and your believability.

It makes it easy for me to give your posts the interest they deserve.

Regards,