Strike zone

[LMan]

Originally Posted by buckweat

I hoped there would be at least a few officials on this BB who were subject to its use or under the direction of MLB through the various channels, but evidently there aren’t or they ain’t talkin’.

You kiddin', right? You think a MLB ump would spend this kind of time trying to find a grain of sense in NIump?

They are far too busy cowardly kneeling in front of MLB managers, no doubt

[buckweat]

Originally Posted by LMan

You kiddin', right? You think a MLB ump would spend this kind of time trying to find a grain of sense in NIump?

They are far too busy cowardly kneeling in front of MLB managers, no doubt

I didn’t say a MLB ump. I said an ump who came under MLB direction. That could be any ump from Rookie ball up. I imagine there are at least a few minor league umpires with a little time on their hands.

But, someone who’s attended one of the 2 MLB approved umpire’s schools would very likely have a good answer too, if they cared to share it. Not all of them are umping in the pros.

Call me crazy, but I just sent an e-mail to Harry Wendelstedt to see if he might shed some light on the question. I don’t seriously expect an answer, but if I do I’ll be glad to share it, no matter what it says.

Just out of curiosity, IF a miracle did happen, and IF he did answer, and IF he did agree with Niump50, would those of you who find him so offensively wrong be swayed at all? ;-)

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by buckweat

Just out of curiosity, IF a miracle did happen, and IF he did answer, and IF he did agree with Niump50, would those of you who find him so offensively wrong be swayed at all? ;-)

I would be so shocked that I would be forced to quit umpiring forever! No, really!!

[LMan]

I'm confident that Mr Wendelstedt will not sanction the 'practice' of calling breaking balls in the dirt strikes, and that refusal to do so is clear evidence of cowardice

[buckweat]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I would be so shocked that I would be forced to quit umpiring forever! No, really!!

Frankly, I’ll be shocked if I even get a reply to such a silly argument, but if all of those things did come true, why would you even consider giving up such a noble endeavor? All it would mean is that you were mistaken about one small facet of umpiring, not that you were a dangerous idiot who was endangering anyone’s life. Its only a freakin’ game!

Originally Posted by LMan

I'm confident that Mr Wendelstedt will not sanction the 'practice' of calling breaking balls in the dirt strikes, and that refusal to do so is clear evidence of cowardice

I didn’t ask anything about it being an act of cowardice because I think that’s just flat silly. There’s a difference between cowardice and just going along with what you’ve been conditioned to do. The only cowardice would be to not change one’s way of doing something once they’ve been presented with overwhelming evidence that the way they were doing it was incorrect.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Buckwheat, get Alfalfa, Spanky and Darla to explain the use of "smilies," which indicate that we are either kidding, being sarcastic, or both.

[buckweat]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Buckwheat, get Alfalfa, Spanky and Darla to explain the use of "smilies," which indicate that we are either kidding, being sarcastic, or both.

Sorry, had you not added that last “smile”, I wouldn’t have mistaken what you were saying. No offense intended.

BTW, my use of “Buckwheat” doesn’t come from the Little Rascals. It comes from my love of those wonderful things you cook on a griddle in the morning, then cover with butter and hot maple syrup, with a few sausage links or slab of ham on the side, with a monster glass of ice cold milk to wash it down.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Why does everybody always want to make my fat a$$ hungry? Now I want breakfast!

[ncump7]

Last year, our assignor sent out a memo to all officials. Do not call the curve ball that hits the dirt a strike. I had previously tried to call the ball that passed through the zone and hit the dirt a strike. I was hearing a lot of crap about it, but just thought I was right and they were wrong. After the memo, I call them a ball and never hear a word. It works for me. I work strictly high school varsity games.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

I waited a long time to enter this fray and I'm fairly sure that the hornet's nest I'm about to stir up is unappreciated.

Call what you see and get the damn call right!

Most of you know my experience and while pro school was very long ago, we were taught that the catcher matters little in the outcome of the call. If the ball passed through the zone and is uncaught, do you call it a strike? Do you allow a catcher to grab it in such a way that a ball outside the zone looks close enough to call it a strike?

Depending on the level of ball you work, you may be able to get away with 'finding' a strike. Watch enough Minor and Major League games and you'll see pitches that miss by a whisker and the umpire never blinks - Ball!

The definition of a strike is what? We are supposed to call the play per the rules and using our judgement. Nowehere in any respected umpire manual or rule book does it state that this is supposed to be easy. If you make the expected call because you don't want grief, shame on you. I've witnessed some incredible curve balls in my day. I don't tell the coach, "Get a better catcher and I can call some of those." We are supposed to reward good pitching, not penalize bad catching!

[buckweat]

Originally Posted by ncump7

Last year, our assignor sent out a memo to all officials. Do not call the curve ball that hits the dirt a strike. I had previously tried to call the ball that passed through the zone and hit the dirt a strike. I was hearing a lot of crap about it, but just thought I was right and they were wrong. After the memo, I call them a ball and never hear a word. It works for me. I work strictly high school varsity games.

In that case, its pretty cut and dried. If you want to work, you work the way the guy that gives you the work wants the work done. I have absolutely no problem with that! But that’s different than the ump just deciding he’s gonna do it on his own.

When that happens, everything’s on the “boss”. If someone doesn’t like it, they can certainly take it up with his boss.

Originally Posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

I waited a long time to enter this fray and I'm fairly sure that the hornet's nest I'm about to stir up is unappreciated.

Call what you see and get the damn call right!

Most of you know my experience and while pro school was very long ago, we were taught that the catcher matters little in the outcome of the call. If the ball passed through the zone and is uncaught, do you call it a strike? Do you allow a catcher to grab it in such a way that a ball outside the zone looks close enough to call it a strike?

Depending on the level of ball you work, you may be able to get away with 'finding' a strike. Watch enough Minor and Major League games and you'll see pitches that miss by a whisker and the umpire never blinks - Ball!

The definition of a strike is what? We are supposed to call the play per the rules and using our judgement. Nowehere in any respected umpire manual or rule book does it state that this is supposed to be easy. If you make the expected call because you don't want grief, shame on you. I've witnessed some incredible curve balls in my day. I don't tell the coach, "Get a better catcher and I can call some of those." We are supposed to reward good pitching, not penalize bad catching!

I’m not familiar with your experience, but I’m assuming that since you went to pro school “very long ago”, your experience and training far exceeds most of the posters on BB’s like this.

What you’re saying is exactly the way as a "layman" who understands how hard it is to call pitches, common sense tells me it should be.

Call what you see and get the damn call right, and We are supposed to reward good pitching, not penalize bad catching, just about say it all as far as I’m concerned.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

I waited a long time to enter this fray and I'm fairly sure that the hornet's nest I'm about to stir up is unappreciated.

Call what you see and get the damn call right!

Most of you know my experience and while pro school was very long ago, we were taught that the catcher matters little in the outcome of the call. If the ball passed through the zone and is uncaught, do you call it a strike? Do you allow a catcher to grab it in such a way that a ball outside the zone looks close enough to call it a strike?

Depending on the level of ball you work, you may be able to get away with 'finding' a strike. Watch enough Minor and Major League games and you'll see pitches that miss by a whisker and the umpire never blinks - Ball!

The definition of a strike is what? We are supposed to call the play per the rules and using our judgement. Nowehere in any respected umpire manual or rule book does it state that this is supposed to be easy. If you make the expected call because you don't want grief, shame on you. I've witnessed some incredible curve balls in my day. I don't tell the coach, "Get a better catcher and I can call some of those." We are supposed to reward good pitching, not penalize bad catching!

Windy, Windy, Windy..............


It's been a while since the two of us have had a dispute over a touchy subject such as this. However, I have to tell you how dissapointed I am that you posted what you did. Are you actually saying that you'll call a pitch that's been gloved in the dirt a strike even if you felt it "passed" through the zone?

This idealogy flies in the face of every professional clinician's take that I've ever met. I usually see at least 20 games at the single A level each season alone, and I've never, not once seen this pitch called a strike. This doesn't count the 150 or more games below that level I either call or watch each season.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the message you're trying to impart. Please elaborate.



Tim.

[wmandino]

Nicely Put.

Very Clear Understanding.


But that is only my opinion

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Tim, not only can I, but I have and continue to call pitches that pass through the zone as strikes. I am not casting aspersions, some people feel it is okay to ignore a missed base or plate, others think that a 'technical' balk at the end of a tight game is not conscionable. I was taught to call what I see and ignore the consequences - umpirs are always right. Over the years I learned that I may not always be right, but I'm the final word. About eight years ago, I met a few guys who were positing a theory that we should do all we can to ensure that the correct call is made. When I proposed this online, I was ridculed. I didn't fall out of the idiot's tree and strike every branch on the way down. The Pros, NCAA and Fed have all adopted some form of doing what we can to correct bad calls or conference to make the right one in the first place.

That said, I asked two questions that brought it to light for me. Go back and read them. In every disagreement I have ever had regarding the big bender that nips the dirt, no one has ever been able to get around those questions. The onus is on the pitcher, not the catcher. I don't know how many partners I've talked to that say, "I finally got the catcher to glove it up in the zone - he was costing his pitcher five strikes an inning." I usually shake my head and ask what his criteria for calling a strike is. Does it have to pass through the zone? "Yes, of course". Well then, does the catcher have to cleanly catch it? "No.", is the usual reply. So why do you allow an uncaught third strike but not allow the ones you were letting go today? "Uhhhhhhh." It's okay, the fact is that we all have to call our game. I don't require a catcher to save a pitch that qualified as a strike.

By the way, a great 12-6 bender is hard to find. More likely you will see a lefty that tosses a great 2-8 deuce to a right handed catcher. The ball never seems to track into the webbing though. I've got plenty of dings on my shoes from these pitches that were strikes.

Again, if you don't feel the need to call what you see and not what is expected, then that is your judgement. I've been around long enough that the coach doesn't bark that my eyesight must be going. They usually yell at the catcher or batter. For what it's worth, I used to ask for every ball that hit the dirt - just like in the pros. I would exchange baseballs and give the old one a quick rub and use it later. It slowed the game down and made me look like I was being too authoritative. The reason I bring that up, is the other night I worked a rec game with a bunch of guys I used to see in High School and College ball. After the first one nicked the ground, the catcher instinctively reached back with the ball and I chuckled. I told him that his arm was stronger than mine. He turned his head and asked if I wanted to give him a new ball. I smiled and said that if his thirty six year old battery mate can make that little scratch do something, I'd buy them drinks afterwards. He laughed and tossed it back to the guy - the hurler lasted two innings before his elbow started throbbing!

Call what you see and don't worry about what the coaches think should be called. We've had enough threads about coaches and umpires. I've gotten to the point in my life where I don't care if they don't like that ninth inning balk or missed tag when the ball was there five steps ahead of the steal. Call what you see and let the game decide itself.

[Tim C]

I want to make one thing clear. . .

I respect WWTB and his stance on "get the call right."

WWTB has never waivered from his committment to this 21st Century edict from the "powers that be."

That being said, I stand firmly behind his committment that he calls ALL PITCHES STRIKES that are strikes.

I will continue to disagree with him on calling a strike that passes through the strike zone and bounces to the catcher's mitt -- but that is all I do. . . I disagree but respect his right to call games as he sees necessary.

BTW, I also call strikes that may be eventually uncaught by F2.

Regards,