why is the hammer strike taking over?
 

Does anyone know why the hammer is being used more widely in baseball? I'm an old school guy and I feel that strikes should be exclusively signaled with the point and the hammer should be reserved exclusively for outs. And besides, doesn't everyone remember the doug eddings controversy?

And btw, does anyone know why Tim McClelland has switched to the box stance and hammer on called strikes? I've seen footage of him last decade and I liked his kneeling stance and point to the side for called strikes (he'd actually turn left for lefty batters and turn right for righty batters) much better than his current stance...

The same reason black and polo blue are the primary colors of most associations. The same reason beanie caps are nearly extinct. The same reason charcoal gray pants are becoming the norm. Times change, styles change.

I personally like the hammer for called strikes, and the point (with head still facing the pitcher) on swinging strikes.

I think the hammer causes confusion and that is why I do not use it. I do not see that I ever will. Then again I do not live in a place where that thing is dictated either.

Peace

What he said. So I guess all I can add is love and chicken grease.

What is confusing about the hammer in general?

Why is this such an issue? If you don't like using the hammer, don't. I doubt anyone will care much.

I was taught the hammer in 1989. Hardly just now taking over. I don't recall ever having a complaint about being confused.

I think the hammer hardly ever looks lazy...where the point can appear lazy if you're not sharp every time.

Not an authority on this subject, but I think it has somethingto do with a MLB supervisor or two liking it over the point. From there it has trickled down to almost every corner of our little world. However, I am sticking with my head turned point, at least for now, I like it and so do my supervisors, on me at least.

I attended a HS mechanics clinic in NJ and officials are being told taught to use the hammer. The reason explained at the clinic is that most umpires turn their heads to the side, taking their eyes off of the ball, when they point.

That's the reason I heard it's recomended for 2 man mechanics.

IMO Here is the Real Reason
 

Across everything else in our society, people in authority want uniformity. They want everyone to be a clone, to do everything the same way, so that we will always make the same call the same way.

Since the SB people have been sold a bill of goods, that there is a perfect mechanic and this is how you do it, it won't be too long until the baseball people try to do the same thing.

When I went to pro school many years ago, they taught us the hammer too, but then they taught us all kinds of things that nobody in their right mind would want to see in a game. They were teaching to the lowest common denominator because there were experienced umpires and raw rookies in the class, and they wanted to impress certain ideas in mechanics as right.

Then when the hired people went to UDP camp, they were told to dump a lot of the extra stuff they were taught at Harry's, and the idea was "get it right", and get in the right position to get it right. they did not care what your strike call was, just get it right.


Now it seems that we all have to do everything the same way, as the CCA manual instructs. Do it our way or else. I am very low on the college totem pole, so if they want things done a certain way I will do them with a smile and a yessir, since I want to umpire lots of college baseball. But that does not mean I agree with the mechanics used. For example, I worked with a great guy the other day, and he told me that I had a strange way of starting play after a dead ball: I said "play" and pointed with my left hand, not my right. We were also taught at school to point with the RH for a LH batter when he swings on a check, and the LH when a righty does it. I guess now since the back of the CCA manual has it the other way, I am now wrong instead of different. I hope an evaluator does not grade me down if he sees me with my out of date/out of fashion mechanics. It bothers me.

It is not a good situation, as far as I am concerned.

1. Those days are over. PBUC does care.
2. Somethings are the same. PBUC is still dumping a lot of what Harry's teaches.

You are giving an "out" signal when you do not have an out. Things like a dropped third strike or a steal home can have all kinds of misinterpretations of such a signal. Signals should be used to communicate something without saying a word. And the Eddings situation was a perfect example. Eddings had to use a non-sanctioned signal to communicate a swing that no one really knew what it meant but Eddings at the time.

Peace

I use the exact opposite: I give a sharp, crisp point on called strikes, with a casual Tim Tschida-style semi-hammer for swinging strikes, more as an afterthought, since everyone in the house knows it was a swing.

On check-swing "yes, he went" strikes, I point with the hand of the batter's box of the hitter, and then give a sharp hammer to go with the verbal.

On uncaught 3rd strikes with a BR situation, I do not give a hammer in this case. I point to the side several times, and everyone gets the idea. Never has anyone questioned the status of the BR whenever I did it this way.