Catching Ettiquette

[Rufus]

I was watching the a LL WS qualifier this weekend and noticed that the catchers from Washington were "pulling" pitches into the strike zone, sometimes by seemingly large distances.

I coach catchers and one of the things I stress is that they shouldn't "pull" pitches that are not strikes and try to make them look like strikes. I've been told umpires view this as disrespectful and an attempt to deceive. By all means I coach them to catch strikes as strikes (i.e., not to let the glove move after being caught and there are framing techniques that don't involve pulling pitches).

Can you all help me understand how you view "pulling" pitches and whether or not this is a hot-button issue for you? I'm not implying/saying you would change your calls based on what the catcher is/isn't doing (you know your strike zone and if the ball was in there). My interest is in trying to figure out how best to communicate to the kids I coach how you view the whole issue of framing (good, keep strikes strikes) and pulling (not good, trying to make a ball a strike).

Thanks in advance.

[Welpe]

A catcher pulling a pitch tells me he thinks it wasn't a strike. I will tell the catcher as much. I don't take offense to it but I don't reward it either.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Welpe

A catcher pulling a pitch tells me he thinks it wasn't a strike. I will tell the catcher as much. I don't take offense to it but I don't reward it either.

Same here.

[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.

[yawetag]

I was told that framing a pitch is an art, requiring a catcher to learn to "twist" his glove to catch the ball, apparently by tucking the elbow into the body. This keeps the glove in the same relative place, but extends the fingers outward, making it appear the glove was never moved.

I don't know if this is true or not, as I was never a catcher. This was told to me by a trainer in our organization.

[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.

[piaa_ump]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

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.

agreed 100%.......my thoughts exactly

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Rufus

Can you all help me understand how you view "pulling" pitches and whether or not this is a hot-button issue for you? I'm not implying/saying you would change your calls based on what the catcher is/isn't doing (you know your strike zone and if the ball was in there). My interest is in trying to figure out how best to communicate to the kids I coach how you view the whole issue of framing (good, keep strikes strikes) and pulling (not good, trying to make a ball a strike).

Around here varsity catchers don't move the mitt much. If I find one doing it, I'll tell him to hold the mitt nice and still so I can get the strike: "when you pull it, that tells everyone you thought it was a ball, and I'm likely to agree with you."

[David B]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Around here varsity catchers don't move the mitt much. If I find one doing it, I'll tell him to hold the mitt nice and still so I can get the strike: "when you pull it, that tells everyone you thought it was a ball, and I'm likely to agree with you."

Very well put, I agree totally!

Thanks
David

[kylejt]

I don't find it disrespectful at all. Ignorant, yes.

He's just badly coached, that's all. Actually, he's helping me out. If he's gotta move the glove after he catches it, it's a ball. It's that simple.

If it's just a kid at the local level, I'll school him as I'm cleaning the plate. Otherwise they'll have to just figure it out themselves.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Rufus

I was watching the a LL WS qualifier this weekend and noticed that the catchers from Washington were "pulling" pitches into the strike zone, sometimes by seemingly large distances.

I coach catchers and one of the things I stress is that they shouldn't "pull" pitches that are not strikes and try to make them look like strikes. I've been told umpires view this as disrespectful and an attempt to deceive. By all means I coach them to catch strikes as strikes (i.e., not to let the glove move after being caught and there are framing techniques that don't involve pulling pitches).

Can you all help me understand how you view "pulling" pitches and whether or not this is a hot-button issue for you? I'm not implying/saying you would change your calls based on what the catcher is/isn't doing (you know your strike zone and if the ball was in there). My interest is in trying to figure out how best to communicate to the kids I coach how you view the whole issue of framing (good, keep strikes strikes) and pulling (not good, trying to make a ball a strike).

Thanks in advance.

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

[MrUmpire]

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

"Some times calling balls and strikes is like being a detective. We need to use all available clues including what we saw as the ball crossed the plate, where the batter and catcher set up, where the catcher caught the ball, how the catcher caught the ball..." John McSherry, circa 1980

So then, you disagree with John?

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

"Some times calling balls and strikes is like being a detective. We need to use all available clues including what we saw as the ball crossed the plate, where the batter and catcher set up, where the catcher caught the ball, how the catcher caught the ball..." John McSherry, circa 1980

So then, you disagree with John?

Absolutely, that was the point of my statement. I set out to disagree with John McSherry

-Josh

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by jdmara

Absolutely, that was the point of my statement. I set out to disagree with John McSherry

-Josh

Hmmmmmmm. Poor John. It's a shame he didn't have your abilities. He might have become a top plate umpire. Oh, wait. He was THE top plate umpire.