Really? People in MLB want strikes on breaking pitches where the catchers get dirt? Or when the catcher sets up on the inside corner and has to dive back to stab it on the outside corner?

Well, the old saying is true. You can't always get what you want. Those pitches aren't called strikes at ANY level, so why would they all of a sudden want them at the top level of the game?

Why don't you list the names of the "many" or "a number of"?

Give us a source where we can see who spoke out.

It is?

This is a complete lie. I know this because those same people don't want that pitch called a strike when their team is batting, so they don't expect it to be called when they are pitching.

What I meant is: as instant replay is used on broadcasts of college games. I don't know what part of the country you are in, but we have a lot of games broadcasted where I live. I'm in the heart of SEC/ACC country.

The use of replay in these broadcasts has led many top-level college umpires to adopt the "get it right" mantra (especially on the bases) just like their MLB counterparts. They don't want to get burried on a broadcast, either.

Haven't met one yet, though, who will intentionally call a strike on a breaking ball in the dirt that may have touched the strike zone over the plate.

Okay, I'm with you. I thought you meant instant replay being used by umpires.

I umpire at the college level and I don't know of anyone who calls that pitch a strike either. If they do they won't be around long.

It took less than a second for Google to call this video up - "breaking ball in dirt called strike". The game was between the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees. The 12-6 curve crosses the zone and ends in the dirt. Yes, it was called a strike for the out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svACCO88938

Uh oh...it seems that a couple of you think you are better than a MLB umpire. (sigh and roll eyes) It is truly funny to see this debate twist from the original expected call mentality though. Just like hard slides at second now ending in interference calls, MLB is addressing things that have become issues for dinosaurs. The strike zone is still subject to individuality and is not as blatant as the neighborhood play. Still, some have the stones to call that strike.

I worked with a guy who would never call a pitch a strike if the catcher dropped it. I asked him where it is in the book and he said that a AA guy told him to do it that way. Impressive.

What? An MLB umpire missed a pitch? CALL THE PRESS!

I already know that Mike has trouble comprehending what he reads. Now he takes a fan's video from a TV set, with the fan's comment that the pitch is "pretty much on the dirt", and exaggerates that already biased view to his phrase "in the dirt".

The pitch isn't in the dirt.

Seriously, having a strong EGO is necessary for a good official but, having one that comes from a head size way to large for any hat is another thing all together. If you have to resort to Google ytube videos to try and prove your personal opinion then you have stooped lower than the pitch in the dirt.

The neighborhood play came about because for years it was acceptable to take the fielder "out" at second. You could umpire with the a gladiator mentality and watch players get maimed, put up with the brawls as a result of you forcing a fielder to make sure he touched that bag crystal clear perfectly or do a little pre-emptive officiating and shortening your day without these problems.

Over the years it finally dawned on some that taking the player out was a safety problem. As as result of this the fielders could turn a double and not have to worry if they were going to get there legs broken. So please get off your "high horse" about your opinions about the "expected calls" just because you like the attention from stirring the pot.

I think you and Larry need to start a personal forum for the two of you, because your begining to bore the hell out of the rest of us.

Thanks for that. It led me to this:

‪Another 36 Inch Strike Zone‬‏ - YouTube

I'd work (the bases) with that guy any day. Never a dull moment!

I think you and Larry need to start a personal forum for the two of you, because your begining to bore the hell out of the rest of us.>>>

LOL. I catch your drift. I do think the Posada missed bag play was interesting - you don't see that one everyday. And there did seem to be difference of opinion on the proper mechanic.

Since I spent money and bought unlimited access to all MLB games at MLB.com, in rebuttal I'll now post links to every pitch from every game where a breaking ball in the dirt (or caught just above the dirt) was called a "ball" by an MLB umpire, even though it appeared to "catch the zone" by foxtrack or K zone or whatever.

Oh, who am I kidding? Ninety-nine percent of us on this board know that there are soooooo many examples of such a pitch being called a ball from this year alone that it would take far too long to draft that post.

I'm done with this thread.

No, they don't. Pitchers don't throw that pitch for a called strike, they throw it to get the batter to swing and miss. When was the last time you saw a pitcher argue for a ptich in the dirt to be called a strike? They aren't as clueless as some internet umpires.

Anyone trying to convince that you that professional umpires have been told to call that pitch a strike has not spoken with professional umpires or their evaluators, or is lying.

I hope that AA guy is still on the wagon.

In case you couldn't tell, my post was an attempt at sarcasm.