Catching Ettiquette

[Rufus]

Thanks for all the thoughtful replies, I do appreciate them.

Tiger - I agree that framing has gotten a bad rep. I refer to it as receiving and that encompasses everything that keeps a strike a strike (e.g., not letting the glove move after catching, wrapping the ball, etc.).

Yawetag - I'm not sure about a twist, but I instruct catchers to catch the outer half (for pitches on the corners) or upper half (for pitches up/over the middle) of the ball. It involves wrapping the glove around that half of the ball (plus keeping the elbow tucked, receiving not reaching for the ball, etc.).

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by tiger49

First off I hate the word "Framing". Most people equate framing with some movement. I teach catcher's as well and will use the word "Displaying".

Catcher's who frame I often view as begging for strikes. Those who display where the pitch was will usually be able to get me more strikes.

Framing and pulling are two different things. A catcher who can frame properly is an umpire's best friend. A catcher who pulls is setting everyone up for a long day.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Wow. Did someone move the strike zone away from over the plate and not tell us?

Rich,

Not that I'm aware of. Why do you ask? I certainly didn't suggest any such thing.

My comment was in reference to the proper way to track a pitch and proper timing in calling a pitch.

Of course, since you're a coach, I wouldn't expect you to understand any of that.

Josh, on the other hand, suggests that he is an umpire. He needs to understand the proper way to call pitches if he hopes to be any good at it. And, based on his post, he does not understand.

JM

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Josh,



No, you have not.



You do not understand what "timing" is, and I assure you there is no "mechanism".

JM

Huh? Do you know this Josh guy? Where did that come from?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Rich,

Not that I'm aware of. Why do you ask? I certainly didn't suggest any such thing.

My comment was in reference to the proper way to track a pitch and proper timing in calling a pitch.

Of course, since you're a coach, I wouldn't expect you to understand any of that.

Josh, on the other hand, suggests that he is an umpire. He needs to understand the proper way to call pitches if he hopes to be any good at it. And, based on his post, he does not understand.

JM

Nonsense. You track a pitch through the zone. You don't have to see it or follow it after that ... kind of what Josh said. And he said he used the slap of the mitt as a timing mechanism. That isn't mine, but what's wrong with doing that?

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Nonsense. You track a pitch through the zone. You don't have to see it or follow it after that ... kind of what Josh said. And he said he used the slap of the mitt as a timing mechanism. That isn't mine, but what's wrong with doing that?

Where the catcher catches the ball is evidence of the path of the pitch. Why not consider all the evidence? Maybe you thought the pitch missed the zone, but the catcher caught it waist high over the middle of the plate. If you don't consider that evidence, you will call that pitch a ball (erroneously).

Timing is proper use of the eyes, period. Waiting for the slap of the mitt, counting, and other such "mechanisms" may serve to delay the call, but they have nothing to do with timing.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Where the catcher catches the ball is evidence of the path of the pitch. Why not consider all the evidence? Maybe you thought the pitch missed the zone, but the catcher caught it waist high over the middle of the plate. If you don't consider that evidence, you will call that pitch a ball (erroneously).

What? If the pitch missed the zone, and the catcher catches it waist high over the middle of the plate, it was a ball. Where it is caught is completely irrelevant. Just like Davidson's fair ball last week - what happens AFTERward doesn't tell you anything about what happened before.

Timing is proper use of the eyes, period. Waiting for the slap of the mitt, counting, and other such "mechanisms" may serve to delay the call, but they have nothing to do with timing.

Again... what? Timing is timing. Proper use of the eyes is crucial, but has nothing to do with timing. I don't use the slap of the mitt ... but so often the cause of missing pitches is calling them to quickly. ANY mechanism that makes you wait gives you that split second to confirm that your mouth is about to say what your eyes saw.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I don't care where the catcher catches the pitch. I've seen what I need to see before then. I just use him catching the ball as a timing mechanism. If I'm getting flack from the coach because the catcher is framing, I give the catcher an opportunity (between innings) to let the coach know where the pitch was and it was framed nicely.

-Josh

So basically, you are saying that you decided the pitch before it was through the zone. If you ignore F2 (as you stated), then you are deciding the call well before the ball crosses the plate and that is a fact. I've trained enough rookies to know that what you are doing is using tunnel vision and deciding the call before it happens. I can also guarantee you that you do not see very many breaking balls (good ones) because these have to be tracked all the way to the glove in order to decide what they are.

So you can discount John McSherry if you wish but I will tell you this, he was a fantastic man at the plate and a great teacher. His videos are still used by many instructors to teach rookies how to use everything at their disposal to make a proper decision on a pitch. I doubt very much if you could ever attain anything close to what John did.

Damn, again I let the BS at the LLWS and a total moron get me going.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

So basically, you are saying that you decided the pitch before it was through the zone. If you ignore F2 (as you stated), then you are deciding the call well before the ball crosses the plate and that is a fact. I've trained enough rookies to know that what you are doing is using tunnel vision and deciding the call before it happens. I can also guarantee you that you do not see very many breaking balls (good ones) because these have to be tracked all the way to the glove in order to decide what they are.

I completely respect your opinion on here, Ozzy, and normally agree with you. However, it is EXACTLY on breaking balls that we should not let the location of the catcher when he catches it sway our thinking. Not watching the glove doesn't mean we are necessarily using tunnel vision. I do stress with younger umps that they MUST watch the pitch ALL THE WAY through the zone - not just at the front, and definitely not just when it's way out front before the plate as some want to do.

Proper timing will allow you to absorb what you saw without calling what you THOUGHT you were going to see when the pitch hadn't even arrived yet.

Now that I've said that - one caveat. I can count the guys I've umpired that throw in the 90's on 1 finger (and in the interest of full disclosure, my zone was probably not at its best that game - to work at that speed consistently, I admit needing a lot more exposure to that speed); and 80's on both hands. McSherry dealt with 90's and the occasional 100. I will fully admit that at those speeds, the location of the glove might have some informatino for you. And at those speeds, the time that the ball is between plate and glove is REALLY miniscule.

But at 70's and low 80's, I think there's a bigger danger in missing pitches if you DO watch it past the back of the plate. Both erroneous strikes and erroneous balls.

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Damn, again I let the BS at the LLWS and a total moron get me going.

Easy now Ozzy.

The old "call the ball, not the situation" is classic sophomore year umpire stuff. He'll learn. (hopefully)

p.s. I've had to be unscrewed out of the ceiling over this LL nonsense. It's hit way too close home for me this year.

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Now that I've said that - one caveat. I can count the guys I've umpired that throw in the 90's on 1 finger.

Try 80mph from 46 feet. That ball gets on you quicker than a blink. Faster than MLB stuff. I've seen it twice. The catcher plays a HUGE roll, but yes, you've got to be ready for off-speed stuff. It ain't easy out there.

[UmpTTS43]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Not watching the glove doesn't mean we are necessarily using tunnel vision.

It absolutely means you are using tunnel vision.

I do stress with younger umps that they MUST watch the pitch ALL THE WAY through the zone - not just at the front, and definitely not just when it's way out front before the plate as some want to do.

In order to be proficient as a plate umpire, you have to track the ball all the way to the mitt. YOU HAVE TO TRACK THE BALL ALL THE WAY TO THE MITT. Did I mention that YOU HAVE TO TRACK THE BALL ALL THE WAY TO THE MITT?

Proper timing will allow you to absorb what you saw without calling what you THOUGHT you were going to see when the pitch hadn't even arrived yet.

That is why, YOU HAVE TO TRACK THE BALL ALL THE WAY TO THE MITT.

But at 70's and low 80's, I think there's a bigger danger in missing pitches if you DO watch it past the back of the plate. Both erroneous strikes and erroneous balls.

EEK. I'm not going to say it.

More pitches are missed due to not tracking the ball completely than by just watching it through the zone.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by kylejt

Try 80mph from 46 feet. That ball gets on you quicker than a blink. Faster than MLB stuff. I've seen it twice. The catcher plays a HUGE roll, but yes, you've got to be ready for off-speed stuff. It ain't easy out there.

Done that with the larger ball. And I agree. I find that release point easier to call, actually.

[UmpJM]

mbcrowder,

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Huh? Do you know this Josh guy?

Only from his posts on this board.

Where did that come from?

It came from the misinformation he posted and the personal instruction I have received from...

Jim Evans
Dick Nelson
Fran Burke
David Uyl
Derek Crabill
Dan Bellino
John Gelatt
Brad Purdom
Shaun Francis
Dave Buck
Mike Conlin
Sal Giacomantonio

among others.

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Nonsense. You track a pitch through the zone. You don't have to see it or follow it after that ... kind of what Josh said.

Nonsense. Where'd that come from? Your innate knowledge of umpiring?

In my experience, most umpires who espouse this type of nonsense actually are "tunnelling" and lose sight of the pitch 5-10' in front of the plate.

And he said he used the slap of the mitt as a timing mechanism. That isn't mine, but what's wrong with doing that?

Because it is an artificial pausing mechanism and has NOTHING to do with proper timing.

Proper timing is simply waiting to allow your senses to gather and deliver ALL the available information to your brain before starting to make a decision on a call.

JM

[Mrumpiresir]

It is difficult to determine the height of a big curve ball as it crosses the plate. If you see the pitch all the way to the catchers glove you will have a good idea of where the pitch was.

Everyone will agree that a straight fast ball must be caught just below the knee. but a curve ball, on the way down during its trajectory could be caught maybe 6 inches lower and still catch the front of the strike zone.

Newer umpires tend to call low strikes because they don't see where the ball was caught.

The straight fast ball at the belt is a strike but the high curve ball must be caught considerably lower.

Bottom line, in my opinion, it is essential to see the catcher catch the pitch so you can determine the true trajectory of the pitch. I believe this will make you much more consistent. It works for me.