Natural Stance

[TussAgee11]

If you crouch enough, to where your knees and waist are on the same plane, its possible for your zone to be about 6 inches or so. I think all umpires would do the right thing and give the pitcher some leeway on the ones at your letters. Where's he supposed to throw it? The ball is a bit thicker than a piece of paper.

Natural stance means natural athletic standing in my opinion. Hunched over perhaps a tad, knees slightly bent. Thats your strike zone, even if you go into crouching tiger mode.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

If your "crouch" is such that pitches at the level of your head can be plausibly called strikes "because of it" [the "crouch"], then it sure as he!! isn't A "natural stance", however "natural" it may feel to you.

When I have a batter that assumes an exagerated "crouch" at the plate, I am forced to improvise the top end of my strike zone. I am likely to choose what I THINK a batter of the same aproximate size might be expected to swing at standing "normally".

When umpires begin to determine how a batter should position vertically in the box, they are entering an area that they do not belong. What's the big deal? When I question why umpires take such hard-minded approaches, it is usually because they can't get low enough to remain protected by F2. Tuff titties.

And, BTW, it's a judgment call, so STFU and swing the bat.

Nice. Eloquently ended. Punctuates your argument exactly.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

Natural stance means natural athletic standing in my opinion. Hunched over perhaps a tad, knees slightly bent. Thats your strike zone, even if you go into crouching tiger mode.

If there is one thing about athletes, natural is completely individual.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Of course he knows the rule. And no matter how you slice it, canadaump, it is a judgment call. He's right about one thing in particular that's been left unsaid. You need to leave your player hat at the door when you discuss items of interest with a large group of umpires.


Tim.

Why so? I would think we should encourage not discourage players to speak their piece here. Adjust.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

How do you guys determine what a batter's natural stance is? The reason I ask is because last year I had an immediate positive turnaround in my batting when I went into a crouch. It helped me get my legs, arms and torso into the swing, rather than it just being all wrists. It also helped me see the ball better and cover the outside corner of the plate.

How can one say that this is not my natural stance? When my batting average goes up immediatly after assuming this stance, it's hard to argue that it's not natural for me. Yet I have had pitches called strikes at my head because of it. What do you guys think?

Also, as an umpire I sometimes get fooled by the batter ducking when a high strike comes in, thus making it look like the pitch was high when it in fact wasn't. I've missed a few of these, not sure if there is any way I can correct this.

I look at your practice swings. If you don't crouch there, then guess what?

[DonInKansas]

So if a batter lies down in the box, we can only call a strike if the ball is rolled to the plate?

Ball/Strike is a judgement call. Swing the bat, Twirly Tornado.

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

I do not appreciate being spoken to that way.

Tough

Saying that "it's a judgement call" is just a way to hide the fact that you do not in fact know the rule.

Wrong again, rat-breath: just cheese to go with your whine. The RULE is: what your "natural stance", ie: when you are prepared to strike at a pitch, IS A JUDGMENT CALL.

And why did you put me on your ignore list?

I haven't [yet].

Ah ha, now this makes more sense. I swing from my crouched stance, so the umpire should be calling based on the way I stand in my stance.

More sense to you, perhaps, but your interpretation of tcarilli's cite is wrong, beside being self-serving. See comments [mine and others above] about "exagerated" crouches. I have seen players come to the plate, take a couple "loosening" swings, then settle into a "batting crouch" such that they can touch their elbows to their knees: more often than not, they have no intention whatever of swinging the bat at ANYTHING - they are there to draw a walk. Well, I for one am not gonna reduce the "window" for strikes to the literal size of a letterbox.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

I look at your practice swings. If you don't crouch there, then guess what?

You assume warmups always equal to natural motions? Think about this.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by fitump56

You assume warmups always equal to natural motions? Think about this.

Think about this - when a batter steps into the box and does his part of the "dance", 99% of them will be swinging in that plane. For the 1% that decide to crouch when F1 releases, TS on them! By the way, I didn't attain a 398 average in MiLB by changing my swing plane when F1 delivered.

Regards

[DonInKansas]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Think about this - when a batter steps into the box and does his part of the "dance", 99% of them will be swinging in that plane. For the 1% that decide to crouch when F1 releases, TS on them! By the way, I didn't attain a 398 average in MiLB by changing my swing plane when F1 delivered.

Regards

Maybe you could've hit .400 if you had!

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Think about this - when a batter steps into the box and does his part of the "dance", 99% of them will be swinging in that plane. For the 1% that decide to crouch when F1 releases, TS on them! By the way, I didn't attain a 398 average in MiLB by changing my swing plane when F1 delivered.

Regards

Then the batter should warmup in a crouch, enter the box the same and stay that way the entire time at bat. Can he walk to/fro the dugout erect?

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by DonInKansas

So if a batter lies down in the box, we can only call a strike if the ball is rolled to the plate?

"Stance", remember?

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

I look at your practice swings. If you don't crouch there, then guess what?

Then you would call his crouch if he took practice swings in one then came to the plate erect?

[canadaump6]

Well, it seems to me like people are saying a lot of different things on this subject matter. Some are saying they will call based on however the batter swings. Some will assume the same stance for every batter which they deem to be natural and call the high strike based on that stance. .

A lot of different opinions and interpretations. What is the general consensus?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

A lot of different opinions and interpretations. What is the general consensus?

What makes you think there is one?

Here's my take: the further your batting stance is from "normal," the less likely you are to have the rule-book zone applied.