Perception or Reality

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by dfwump

Guys please re-read this carefully, put yourself in the situation as described and tell me truthfully, honestly, what would be your call. I have clearly stated what mine would be. And IMHO its a no-brainer.

Mike C

Truthfully, honestly...SAFE, NO TAG!

I have never given a coach's arse what anyone thought of my call. I'm an umpire, not the beer salesman.

[BSUmp16]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Truthfully, honestly...SAFE, NO TAG!

I have never given a coach's arse what anyone thought of my call. I'm an umpire, not the beer salesman.

Do you make calls as you want, or, as others here do, as your assignor wants?

I take it you always call the 12-6 in the dirt that crosses the zone a strike? The inside pitch that nicks the corner but the catcher misses - you've got a strike? The crossed-up pitch that hits the outside corner but the catcher lunges for? All strikes? If so, good for you. If not, you obviously do care what someone else thinks; and make sure you keep the beers cold - you'll sell more that way.

[jkumpire]

Well,

Last night I was watching the Indians and White Sox in Chicago, and Carmona was throwing nasty stuff. Everything moved around faster than a PGA Tour player on a golf cart.

I am sure this did not get on MLB.com, but Carmona threw a pitch to Konerko that moved so much Lou Marson (I think who was the F2) who was set up outside he reached inside to catch it. Well, the pitch was just off the middle of the plate, it wasn't close to inside, and our PU rang up the strike.

Now Konerko saw where Marson's glove was, as opposed to where Marson was, and stood int he box and raised cain about the pitch. The Play-by-play man and color guy talked about how Knoerko handled it with class, and didn't show up the umpire, but complained for a long time about the pitch.

There was no false zone posted on the screen, and I wish there would have been, because it was a clear strike and should have been called. But the pitch made Marson look bad and if was borderline, it's a ball. Several CWS umpires did the same thing in Omaha, and nobody said boo.

This is all brought up to say one thing, even in MLB: If it's a clear strike, or the ball beats the fielder, and the close tag/maybe no tag is made, it's an out. It looks like an out and should be called and out.

But there are times where it looks bad, and it's still a strike or an out, and sometimes it looks bad and it isn't an out. That's why they pay good umpires not so good inflated American currency to call games, because they use good judgement on plays like this and know when to make the 'expected call' and when not to.

[BSUmp16]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

Well,

Last night I was watching the Indians and White Sox in Chicago, and Carmona was throwing nasty stuff. Everything moved around faster than a PGA Tour player on a golf cart.

I am sure this did not get on MLB.com, but Carmona threw a pitch to Konerko that moved so much Lou Marson (I think who was the F2) who was set up outside he reached inside to catch it. Well, the pitch was just off the middle of the plate, it wasn't close to inside, and our PU rang up the strike.

Now Konerko saw where Marson's glove was, as opposed to where Marson was, and stood int he box and raised cain about the pitch. The Play-by-play man and color guy talked about how Knoerko handled it with class, and didn't show up the umpire, but complained for a long time about the pitch.

There was no false zone posted on the screen, and I wish there would have been, because it was a clear strike and should have been called. But the pitch made Marson look bad and if was borderline, it's a ball. Several CWS umpires did the same thing in Omaha, and nobody said boo.

This is all brought up to say one thing, even in MLB: If it's a clear strike, or the ball beats the fielder, and the close tag/maybe no tag is made, it's an out. It looks like an out and should be called and out.

But there are times where it looks bad, and it's still a strike or an out, and sometimes it looks bad and it isn't an out. That's why they pay good umpires not so good inflated American currency to call games, because they use good judgement on plays like this and know when to make the 'expected call' and when not to.

My sentiments exactly. Sometimes ya just gotta umpire.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by BSUmp16

Do you make calls as you want, or, as others here do, as your assignor wants?

I take it you always call the 12-6 in the dirt that crosses the zone a strike? The inside pitch that nicks the corner but the catcher misses - you've got a strike? The crossed-up pitch that hits the outside corner but the catcher lunges for? All strikes? If so, good for you. If not, you obviously do care what someone else thinks; and make sure you keep the beers cold - you'll sell more that way.

Look, you asked for an honest answer, and I gave you one. I call my strike zone the same way I have for 26 years now, and it hasn't changed a smidgen, despite all the high strike crap that has been pushed down our throats. Sure, it gets slightly expanded a little for 18A or 18 Rookie type leagues, where most of the players haven't picked up a bat since Little League. But at the higher levels, with former big league and college players all over the place, my zone is polished and precisely where I want it called, not where anyone else dictates, assignors included. I have never had any assignor ignorant enough to try to tell me how to call ball. When I quit playing ball in 1985, and started umpiring, it all came very naturally to me, and didn't need outside help.

I very rarely receive any complaints about the zone I call, so it must be okay. I do get occasional complaints about the pitch call, but that is because I missed it, based on MY zone that people get used to in the first inning. If a catcher is trying to fool me into calling a inside pitch by pulling his mitt back to the corner, but forgets to actually catch the ball, no friggin way is he getting a strike. But if the pitch actually nips MY corner, it matters not at all to me if he catches the ball or not. A strike is a strike. If the 12-6 curve (and I've called Zito's back when it was better, and Silva and Harang had pretty good ones back then as well IIRC) doesn't pass through the bottom of MY zone, then it isn't a strike. If the curve is pretty enough, nobody will complain on strike calls just because the catcher doesn't catch them properly. A 12-6 curve that hits the dirt is the catcher's fault. It's his job to make his pitcher look good, not mine.

[BSUmp16]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Look, you asked for an honest answer, and I gave you one. I call my strike zone the same way I have for 26 years now, and it hasn't changed a smidgen, despite all the high strike crap that has been pushed down our throats. Sure, it gets slightly expanded a little for 18A or 18 Rookie type leagues, where most of the players haven't picked up a bat since Little League. But at the higher levels, with former big league and college players all over the place, my zone is polished and precisely where I want it called, not where anyone else dictates, assignors included. I have never had any assignor ignorant enough to try to tell me how to call ball. When I quit playing ball in 1985, and started umpiring, it all came very naturally to me, and didn't need outside help.

I very rarely receive any complaints about the zone I call, so it must be okay. I do get occasional complaints about the pitch call, but that is because I missed it, based on MY zone that people get used to in the first inning. If a catcher is trying to fool me into calling a inside pitch by pulling his mitt back to the corner, but forgets to actually catch the ball, no friggin way is he getting a strike. But if the pitch actually nips MY corner, it matters not at all to me if he catches the ball or not. A strike is a strike. If the 12-6 curve (and I've called Zito's back when it was better, and Silva and Harang had pretty good ones back then as well IIRC) doesn't pass through the bottom of MY zone, then it isn't a strike. If the curve is pretty enough, nobody will complain on strike calls just because the catcher doesn't catch them properly. A 12-6 curve that hits the dirt is the catcher's fault. It's his job to make his pitcher look good, not mine.

Fair enough