Let's have a thread about strike zones!

[mroyal]

You could even get into a discussion of catchers "framing" pitches to get the call. I think it's a slippery slop to allow a catcher to influence an umpire to get a strike. Call it like you see it. Even if you allow a catcher to help you make a call/no-call, why would you admit it in public? It should never be about persuasion, but about the rule. That keeps the playing field level.

[Welpe]

Properly framing pitches is something a good catcher should be doing. Now pulling pitches...that's a different story.

[DonInKansas]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Properly framing pitches is something a good catcher should be doing. Now pulling pitches...that's a different story.

Agreed. A "framed" pitch is a pitch that's caught well. A "pulled" pitch just looks terrible. Good coaches, catchers, and umpires can tell the difference. These two terms are definitely not interchangable.

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Properly framing pitches is something a good catcher should be doing. Now pulling pitches...that's a different story.

When doing the plate, if a catcher starts pulling pitches, I will tell him quietly: "Stick 'em, but don't pull 'em". Normally no problems after that. YMMV

[mroyal]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Properly framing pitches is something a good catcher should be doing. Now pulling pitches...that's a different story.

Maybe that's playing the word game. To me, framing is an attempt by a catcher to make a pitch look like or bring it to a location giving it the appearance of being a strike. Framing is a negative for me (whether you pull, push, pluck or yank).

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by mroyal

... Framing is a negative for me (whether you pull, push, pluck or yank).

mroyal,

I would not consider any of those actions "framing".

Framing is when the catcher "sticks it" without moving his glove afer the catch and holds it for a "scant second" to show the PU that's exactly where he wanted the pitch to be.

JM

[johnnyg08]

I have to educate some of the younger catchers who will "frame" every pitch...especially the very obvious balls. As posted earlier, usually one friendly message in the ear hole does the job...typically catchers know to try and build a rapport w/ PU

[JFlores]

according to fans, strike zones are like a$$holes, every umpire has one and they all stink.

[JR12]

Usually if it cuts my zone, it's a strike. However sometimes you have a catcher who turns his mitt down to catch one right at the knee. Then sometimes the catcher sets up right on one corner and the pitcher hits the other corner. The catcher has to reach way over and fall to his knees to catch the pitch. Hard to give him those.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by mroyal

Maybe that's playing the word game. To me, framing is an attempt by a catcher to make a pitch look like or bring it to a location giving it the appearance of being a strike. Framing is a negative for me (whether you pull, push, pluck or yank).

A good catcher will frame a pitch by folding the glove and holding it for the umpire to get a good look. The only movement is the folding of the glove.

Any catch that is moved other than the above is framing the umpire.

[jkumpire]

Interesting thread, I appreciate very much the discussion.

As I take a lot of college games again after a long absence, I see that I have to make some adjustments to conform with modern practice. It has been a challenge, but one I enjoy. Even my summer college level ball did not prepare me for some changes I have needed to make. It is interesting, and help tp hear the discussion.

[briancurtin]

I don't think I've seen legit framing below the college level - be it movement of the arm or a hard flick of the wrist, whatever some dad is teaching at the time. College catchers have framing on the corners figured out, but low spots sometimes go unframed and caught downwards.

The frame job is done the instant the ball hits the glove. It's all in how the act of how the catch is made and is done after that (unless you are fooled by this type of thing). Holding it there for any length of time, to me, is a sign that the catcher himself doesn't think it's a strike.

[cc6]

I think whether you use the catcher or not to help call the game depends on the quality of the pitching. If a pitcher is throwing low 70's, you probably won't need to read the catcher's body language to determine if the pitch is a strike. But if it is mid 80's or higher, there is less time to watch the pitch as it crosses the plate. Also, movement comes into play- easier to call a straight fastball than one with a tail on it. I find it is especially important to use the catcher to help call pitches that are low or outside. If the catcher catches a low one with the palm up, it had better be obvious that the pitch was high enough. As for calling a pitch outside of the strikezone a strike because of how the catcher caught it, I'm not in the habit of doing this. Not the batter's job to know how the catcher is going to recieve the pitch.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by cc6

As for calling a pitch outside of the strikezone a strike because of how the catcher caught it, I'm not in the habit of doing this. Not the batter's job to know how the catcher is going to recieve the pitch.

A batter is crowding the plate. The ball is two widths outside. His "sweet spot" easily reaches 2 feet past that pitch. Everyone wants you to call it a strike, the OC the DC, and just about everyone on both teams and in the stands. They give you permission. The most famous coach in SEC history tells you before the season to call strikes. That or you can use that $3 strike zone cartoon and the black and white letter of the law. You pay $3000 to hear Mr. Evans' associates tell you it is your call to call that pitch the way you see it. "What ya gat?" Ball.