How to move to view pitch
 

This has happened to me more than a few times this season and i want to see how you guys handle it.

Working the plate and the catcher calls for a high fastball and practically stands up and blocks your entire view of the strike zone. The pitcher delivers, but not high as the catcher called for it, but right in/near the strike zone at the waist/thighs.

Where/how do you move in this situation to get the best view of this pitch? I know i've called 90% of these balls just because i wasn't sure because of the crappy view i had, and some could have very well been strikes.

I don't move. Most coaches will understand a ball call on this because they realize that their catcher blocked your view. They were calling for a pitch out of the strike zone to begin with, so they really can't get too upset with a ball call. They're usually just glad the batter didn't lose the mistake in the left field bleachers.

I agree with Steve.

One other thing to keep in mind though;

You're going to see a lot of pitches where you don't see the plate, due to the catcher making some sort of move that blocks you. So you better learn where the plate is, and get comfortable making calls when you can't see the plate. That is the beauty of the GD Stance. The plate is always in the same place, relative to your nose. I hardly even pay attention to it any more. :p

After I started using the GD stance, I found that because you are working high already, this situation doesn't happen as often any more.

one thing you may need to be aware of too...especially if you're working 1 man...at lower levels of baseball "guys who don't shave" you'll have hitters swinging at some of those pitches...or check swinging...just be prepared for that...if you're totally obstructed...you might not be able to make the correct call..

I can't remember a catcher who was so fat he blocked both the plate AND the batter when he stood up!

Also, I work the Gerry Davis stance and am back far enough so as to be able to see the batter no matter what.

Call it a ball no matter what. If there is protest from the catcher and/or coach, explain that the catcher blocked your view.

At no time should you move to try to see the pitch! Once you are down, STAY DOWN! If the catcher is not skilled and keeps blocking your view (this is provided that you are properly positioned in the slot) call balls, and remind the catcher to stay down on the pitch so you can see it. It might be a long day that day, but a coach and catcher that care will make the adjustments in the future to allow you to see the zone.

PDX - I understand your point, but will you then snap at the catcher for not getting that high one that hits you in the mask because YOU told him to get down?

We are not talking about the pitch that is out of the zone. We are talking about the catcher standing up on pitches that are IN the zone!

And I don't tell them to "get down", I tell them to "stay down" if they want me to see a strike.

And in the end, I could care less how often the block me out. I WILL call it a ball, and if they aren't complaining, I don't need to say a thing. It is when they DO complain that you can handle it the way I described above.

I expect the catcher to have the skill to get up and snag the high ones, get down on his knees and block the balls in the dirt, and come up with everything inside. What I don't expect is for him to stand Ray Fosse style to receive the pitch and block me out.

If the catcher stands up to catch the ball, when there is a runner attempting to steal, call it a strike if it is close to the zone, or a hittable pitch. Everyone is watching the runner, everyone expects the catcher to stand up, and it lets you get an extra strike.

Maybe I'm just reading this post wrong (I hope), as nothing was said (here) about the pitch not being seen, but it seems to me that "everyone watching the runner....gets you an extra strike", sounds like an ump "has a hot date, wants to get out of there" scenario. After 10 yrs of varsity umping, I'm there until the game is over, not looking for trick ways to shorten the game, by what, 45 seconds?...

I use Nick's technique all the time. I refer to it as 'stealing a strike'

Close and hittable are the keys elements to this. Many times the batter has the take sign on a steal, so the coach and batter are willing to concede a strike in this situation and I'm happy to oblige.

It's kind of like when a high pitch comes in right down the middle and the batter ducks. "STRIKE"
Do you use this sitch as an opportunity for a strike or do you try to visualize the batters stance prior to ducking and make a judgement on the high pitch?

I love a batter that ducks !

Opens up the high side of the zone.

Sounds to me like this is a non-issue for all you GD'ers out there (i still don't know how you guys see the plate from so far back- then you work high to compensate for that and i don't know how you see low pitches. i guess i gotta try it for myself).

Ok- so next time this happens, i'll continue to call it a ball if i'm not sure and tell the catcher not to pop up next time.

try it some time. it just works, you'll see how it all comes together

Is there some site or something I can get on that explains the GD stance? I read what you guys write about it and how great it is and everything, but I don't exactly know what it is. When I was taught my stance, I wasn't given an official name for it (though i think it might be the heel-toe), so if I see it described then I might realize that I already do it.

The heel-toe and the GD are two different stances.

The GD (Gerry Davis) stance can be found illustrated at:
http://childress.officiating.com/?d=...vis+Part+I.pdf

and

http://childress.officiating.com/?d=...is+Part+II.pdf

I am not a fan of the GD stance at all. All the guys that I see trying it are terribly inconsistent on their low strike, and tend to not give the high strike too often. :(

I use a modified GD stance. I am MUCH closer to the catcher, and do not work that high (which is dangerous! you are more apt to get hit by foul tips working that high....yes, I have tried the GD, and didn't like being that much of a target). I get my chin to the top of the catchers helmet (roughly).

Working three feet behind the catcher just doesn't work. Again, everybody I see calling from that far back usually has a major inconsistency in their strike zone, and it REALLY calls attention to itself! I hear coaches complain all the time about the local guys that use the GD, about how they are "too far back to call the low pitch right" is what I hear most often.

Oh well, those that use the GD are convinced that they are doing everything good. Whatever gets them through a game I guess.

The GD stance is also totally discouraged in the NCAA umpiring standards.

http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/cham...PreviewState=0

How do you get this perception from the document. GD is best for absolutely locking in on a pitch, the first item listed on the document.

If you are inconsistent in GD, you are gonna be inconsistent w/ the box or scissors. The dead-rock-solid lock-in gives you the OPPORTUNITY for an absolutely consistent "look" at every pitch. If you can't call the up/down consistently in GD, the problem is YOU, not your stance.

Oh, yeah: NOBODY doing GD has EVER been hit by a "foul tip":rolleyes: nor in any other stance, for that matter. Foul balls, maybe .... but I've been doing Davis for 2 years now, including time behind some pretty lame catchers, and the only times I've been drilled were pitches that'd hit me no matter what stance I was in ... only difference w/ the stance is WHERE they hit me. Most of what I've been hit by gets the middle plate of my hardshell CP: where it not for the loud THWOCK!!! I'd not know anything had happened.
Well, in fairness to pdx: the last bullet point [does not set up too high or deep] COULD be a shot at GD, although GD seems to hit for every other one of the bullets in the evaluation standard.

If you're getting hit by foul balls a lot, you're almost surely not in a good slot position. When the foul balls are whizzing by your ear but missing you, then you're in the slot.

Sorry, I have just seen far too many guys missing a LOT of low pitches when they set up that high and that far back.

Move closer to the catcher and a bit lower, THEN you got a good thing going!

There is a reason the GD is NOT taught in the pro schools and camps taught by professional umpires. While it may make you "stable", it is still setting you up in a lousy position to call pitches. There are still times when "proximity" is a good thing, and the closer I can get to the plate is MUCH better for calling balls and strikes.

How do you reconcile (on that chart):

"Maintains the same strike zone throughout the game"

and

"Has a grasp of how the zone may be adjusted in a lopsided game"?

..in the same evaluation paragraph?


:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

Well, if the game is not lopsided, and you maintain the same strike zone throughout the game, you have done well.

If the game is lopsided, and you adjusted your zone in a way that kept things moving along, you have done well.

Is this such a hard concept to understand? I don't get what part of that you don't understand. It seemed VERY obvious to me the first time I read it.

I don't know of ANY higher level (at least college level) umpires who DON'T adjust their zone to be a bit bigger in lopsided games. It is a perfectly acceptable practice, and is obviously endorsed by the NCAA.

I would be a fool to call a "rule book" strike zone in a game that is 20-3. I am expanding that zone to get out of their a bit quicker. Nobody is complaining!

I understand the concept perfectly well, I was more or less poking at the apparent contradiction on the form, two paragraphs apart. I take my humor where I can get it :D

Just shows again that you cannot effectively manage a game by going strictly by the rules and nothing but. There is accepted usage, tradition, etc to consider as well if you want to be more than a barely-adequate umpire.

PDX, I'll continue to use the GD. Most of the umpires I work with are now converting to it as well. That is not a coincidence that is irrelevant. I work with NCAA umpires, by the way, who are also seeing an increasing number of GD converts.

I use results to measure success or failure, and my personal results tell me that the GD has made a great improvement in my game.

Maybe I am missing something, but there does not seem to be any contradiction. They want you to call a consistent zone innings 1-9. IF the game becomes lopsided, they want you to be able to "adjust" your zone.

Just because "consistent zone innings 1-9" comes first does not mean that is cast in stone.