Is catching a called strike too much to ask?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

In my experience, at the NCAA level most dropped strikes either crossed up the catcher or are difficult pitches to secure regardless of their location. Those that catch the zone clearly I call strikes. Those that "might have" if I had the opporutnity of a better look at the end, are balls.

Yep. Another, and perhaps better, way of saying what I meant.

[David B]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yep. Another, and perhaps better, way of saying what I meant.

Agreed, you both made this very clear as to what I've called, observed, and been taught.

Thanks
David

[Bulldog]

I worked a couple games today in a H.S. showcase tournament and had an opportunity to call that "cockshot" drop strike and did. I didn’t get a peep from either bench, almost as if they expected it to be called. I used to frown upon those that called dropped strikes because I thought it was a result of poor timing. I still agree that borderline pitches need to be caught but maybe always catching that dropped strike is too much to ask. Thanks to all for the advice.

[amusedofficial]

The striek zone is established by rule, not by where, when, how or if the catcher catches the ball. The rules also anticipate, and address, a dropped third strike, which seems to indicate the rule-makers intent that the strike call be independent of hte catcher's handling of the pitch.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

The striek zone is established by rule, not by where, when, how or if the catcher catches the ball. The rules also anticipate, and address, a dropped third strike, which seems to indicate the rule-makers intent that the strike call be independent of hte catcher's handling of the pitch.

True, but we call strikes and balls based on how they are caught. So that is going to be a factor. Not the only factor, but a factor. And usually a dropped third strike is usually one that is swung at and missed.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

The rules also anticipate, and address, a dropped third strike, which seems to indicate the rule-makers intent that the strike call be independent of hte catcher's handling of the pitch.

That's not consistent with the history of the rule.

[charliej47]

A Strike is a Strike, but I was taught that how the catcher caught the ball was how I called it with some exceptions. To this day I follow those teachings.