Batter out of box

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I'm sorry. I don't understand. The batter squares around before the pitcher is finished winding up, he hasn't released the ball, and the batter has his foot all over the plate, way outside the box, and you don't see it? Or is it that you just don't choose to see it?

My strike zone's east and west borders are determined by their approximate location in relation to the outer edges of the 17 inch whitened 5-sided slab of rubber known as home plate. Part of my vision sees this plate on every pitch, and if there is a person standing on it, I'm going to see it.

Garth, this is not a "hypothetical question." This actually happens once in a blue moon. I wanted an answer to the question, "If you did see it, would you call it?" I didn't want an answer to "If you didn't see it?"

I have games where I pray for it

I have a very good zone, so I am told. I Have called this quite a few times. It is usually foot touching the plate but I have seen guys step away from the plate clearly out of the box. How could you not see it and why would you not call it? Once there is a crack or ping, if the guy is out of the box, I am going to see it and not because I am looking for it but, because it is easy to see.

Joe

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

1. I don't care what level of ball you happened to have worked. Perhaps they were desparate for umpires. I'm sure I could work any level you've ever worked. Quit using that tired old "you're not good enough" crap with me. You really don't know, and shouldn't believe anyone who would say differently. Why do you feel the need to criticize me, or make fun of me for having worked with MLB umpires (true) and many current and former MLB players (also true). It is frankly very unchristianlike, and you claim to be a Christian. How does insulting my experience improve your argument on this subject?

2. I have worked some very high caliber ball, and some pretty good games at that. I have also worked lesser games in which a player has hit the ball while obviously outside of the box. So blatant, that not to call it would be a disservice to the game.

3. I use the mechanics that were taught to me by pro school grads and MiLB umpires, and I have a pretty darn good understanding of the game. I didn't umpire as a hobby, I did it 6 or 7 days a week, nearly year round, for many years. You get a pretty good feel for it after that amount of work is put in, not to mention playing the game my whole life.

4. A real life, non-hypothetical batter was completely and blatantly out of the box when his bat contacted the ball, and I called this batter out. Many other posters would agree with me that I made the right call. You would choose to ignore it. That is your right, I guess.

Steve, are you paranoid or insecure? I didn't make any reference to what level you work other than to relate what you have said. I know you only from your posts. If you have been truthful, I know what you want me to know.

I said our experiences have been different. That is a true statement. That is a universal statement. Only you have experienced your life. Again, this is not a statement about the level of ball anybody works. My experience is different than my partners in the same work we work.

I have never experienced the blatant situations you describe. Never. I also never said that this makes me a better umpire. I said it makes our experiences different.

Get a grip, Steve. Not every disgareement, or difference in experience is a personal affront to you.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

I have games where I pray for it

I Have called this quite a few times. It is usually foot touching the plate...

When the foot was touching the plate, where was the heel? And, as someone else asked more on point, where was the pitch? If you were looking at the foot, you weren't looking at the pitch.

[DG]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

When the foot was touching the plate, where was the heel? And, as someone else asked more on point, where was the pitch? If you were looking at the foot, you weren't looking at the pitch.

There is a perception here that we can't do 2 things at once. Wrong, especially when the two things are mental.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by DG

There is a perception here that we can't do 2 things at once. Wrong, especially when the two things are mental.

They are not, they are visual. If you are focusing on the pitch all the way to the glove, you are not focusing on the foot.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

When the foot was touching the plate, where was the heel? And, as someone else asked more on point, where was the pitch? If you were looking at the foot, you weren't looking at the pitch.

This is why, in every post, I made sure I said that the foot was entirely out of the box, or completely on the plate. I'm sure Joe knows the difference. And it is not at all hard to look down, the instant the ball contacts the bat, and see the location of the foot.

Once again, you guys equate umpiring with rocket science, and make it seem much harder than it actually is. I often tell people that they underestimate how difficult umpiring is, because they do. But some umpires overstate the difficulty.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

This is why, in every post, I made sure I said that the foot was entirely out of the box, or completely on the plate. I'm sure Joe knows the difference. And it is not at all hard to look down, the instant the ball contacts the bat, and see the location of the foot.

Once again, you guys equate umpiring with rocket science, and make it seem much harder than it actually is. I often tell people that they underestimate how difficult umpiring is, because they do. But some umpires overstate the difficulty.

Actually, it's just the opposite. We are simplifyhing the game by performing one task, the most important task at that time, rather than two. It's much easier this way.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Steve, are you paranoid or insecure? I didn't make any reference to what level you work other than to relate what you have said. I know you only from your posts. If you have been truthful, I know what you want me to know.

I said our experiences have been different. That is a true statement. That is a universal statement. Only you have experienced your life. Again, this is not a statement about the level of ball anybody works. My experience is different than my partners in the same work we work.

I have never experienced the blatant situations you describe. Never. I also never said that this makes me a better umpire. I said it makes our experiences different.

Get a grip, Steve. Not every disgareement, or difference in experience is a personal affront to you.

I am neither paranoid nor insecure in the least bit. From day 1 you have ridiculed me on the forums. Don't say I'm being paranoid, because you have been making fun of me ever since I first posted here, and wouldn't let up about it. You thought it was hysterically funny as I recall that I would even mention myself and a pro career in the same sentence, without one scintiila of knowledge of my abilities.

You threw your D-1 and pro ball experience up in my face in your post, as well as your use of CCA mechanics, as if all this was evidence of umpiring ability (BTW-it's not). I am quite certain that there was an implied "I'm better than you" inside your writing. If I'm wrong, I apologize, but I don't think I'm wrong. I think that you really do believe that you are a superior official.

[GarthB]

I just got off the phone with a friend who is working the State Legion Championships. I related this thread to him and he related this:

Earlier today, a batter squared to bunt before the pitcher came set. He had one foot completely out of the box and on the ground. The pitcher came set and delivered. The batter layed down a great bunt and was safe at first.

The PU called him out for being out of the batter's box. The coach came out and complained. The PU told him he definately saw his foot out of the box and on the ground. The coach disagreed. The conversation got out of hand and the coach was ejected.

Kevin, my friend, was watching all this from behind the screen on on the firstbase side of the plate. What the PU didn't see while focusing on the pitch was that just prior to contact, the batter lifted his right foot off the ground and pushed off with his left foot . He was not "out of the batter's box by rule." But becuase the PU paid so much attention to his beginning stance and made a call based on that, he was ruled out and a coach was ejected.

The moral? Keep it simple. Perform the job that is expected of you most to the best of your ability. Keep your eyes on the pitch.

And with that, I bid you all a pleasant good evening. As much fun as this thread used to be, it has become tiring. I'll leave it to others to have the last word.

[SanDiegoSteve]

You made that up. HA! Good one. Coincedence? I think not.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

3. I use the mechanics that were taught to me by pro school grads and MiLB umpires, and I have a pretty darn good understanding of the game.

What was your training from those pro school grads and MiLB umpires, with respect to calling illegal batting (batted ball with one foot out of the box)? Every clinic I've attended or heard about has training very similar to what several guys here are saying - foot out of the box is simply not a priority for the plate umpire.

And that's what they, and I, are trying to convey to those on the board who are looking for sound advice on what this rule means and how it should be enforced. Your strained hypothetical seems aimed only at forcing Tee et. al. to admit that yeah, OK, in that case you would have to call it. But that's an exercise in futility. Tee's maxims are carved in stone; I thought you knew that. Haven't you been around for one of his IIITBTSB threads?

Your hypothetical is distracting from the message the greenhorn (and some others who aren't so green) should be getting from this thread, and it is a message that is supported by professional trainers, and I bet you'll even agree with that. They say, consistently, the same things Tee and Rich are saying:

If you're properly tracking the pitch, then you can't be watching the batters feet. Call the pitch, forget the feet. Discreetly lose the front and inside lines, if they're there, and you can probably avoid having to deal with a whiney coach who picked up the same myth about how illegal batting should be enforced.

It's not about always having to be right; it's about being right, at least on the important points. And in this thread, I think you're right in your head but that's lost because you're racing to a how many umpires can dance on the head of a pin argument, needlessly. Needlessly, that is, unless you need to argue.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I already stated that I don't notice the batter's feet under normal circumstances. I also said I don't care if the batter's foot was outside the box a little when hitting the ball. I don't make a practice of looking at where the batter's feet are.

I did ask a specific question, and yes, it was aimed at those "I never have called that in 4.65 million games" type people. I presented the hypothetical (but really has happened to me) question in order to get people to admit that if they saw something that blatant, they would have the cajones to call it. That's all I was looking for. I didn't ask if they would go out of their way to see it, just that they call it if they do see it, and are certain that it happened.

[DG]

Originally Posted by GarthB

They are not, they are visual. If you are focusing on the pitch all the way to the glove, you are not focusing on the foot.

Visual is just feedback to mental. You are saying we can't focus on the pitch and the foot at the same time, both visual feedbacks, and process both mentally, at the same time. If true we couldn't possibly focus on the foot (visual) and the sound (ball in mitt) at 1B at the same time and make a call at 1B since these are different feedbacks, sight and sound. Plus I don't have to focus all the way to the glove because if the foot is out of the box, and contact is made, it happens before the ball is to the glove.

[UmpJM]

Gentlemen,

I am certainly not looking to "pick a fight" with anyone over this, I'm just trying to understand.

In 12 years of coaching youth baseball (what I'm sure many of you would dismiss as "kiddie ball") I have seen two instances (that I'm aware of) of a batter hitting the ball with one foot on the ground and completely out of the box. In one case, the batter was called out & in the other no call was made. In both cases, it was blatantly obvious that the batter had batted the ball with his foot out of the box.

Earlier this year, one of our umpires (just finished his Freshman year of college - in his fifth year of umpiring) asked me about a situation he had had in a game where he called a CI & the defensive coach argued that the batter had his back foot out of the box at the time the bat hit the catcher's mitt. He stuck with his call & I advised him that he had been correct in doing so.

As I understand it, those on the "I've never seen it" side of the question are suggesting that a PU, if his mechanics and timing are proper, would not be able to see it if it were to happen. This actually makes some sense to me.

Over the weekend, I watched a tournament that featured some fairly high quality baseball and some consistently high quality umpiring. One thing I noticed was how "locked in" the PUs were when calling balls and strikes. They literally did not move a muscle until noticeably after the ball was in the catcher's mitt, past him, or the batter had hit the ball. So, it is not inconceivable to me that a good PU would be so focused on calling the pitch that the location of the batter's feet at the instant of contact would typically be a mystery to him.

However, I'm having a little trouble understanding how the BU in a 2-man crew would be so tightly focused on the ball, from 100' away, that he would not notice if a batter had one or both feet clearly out of the box at the instant of bat-ball contact. Though Garth implied that the BU had other things to be narrowly focused on, I'm a little unclear on HOW one could be so narrowly focused - especially in situations such as an IBB, a pitch-out, or a LH batter attempting a drag bunt. In which admittedly highly unusual case, I would think it should be seen and should be called. If it had never happened, there wouldn't be a rule - in professional baseball. And amateur baseball. At all levels.

Perhaps one of the learned umpires would be so kind as to explain it in a way explicit and simple enough for a poor dumb coach to understand.

Finally, though I've only ever seen one of them actually work a game, I find the notion that Messrs. Christenson, Hensley, Benham, Fronheiser & Crowder would, either individually or collectively, lack the intestinal fortitude to make a call because they were concerned about the COACH's reaction to the call beyond laughably absurd. So, it must be something else.

JM

(Edited to give credit where credit is due.)

[Rich]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

No i dont let them. I just try to keep the game fair, and play by the rules. But I dont know how you guys stand behind the plate, but i can see the pitch and the batters feet too.

Not if you're tracking the pitch into the glove using only your eyes. Sorry, but you're either (1) wrong, or (2) not tracking the pitch correctly.