I probably should have worded my question differently. I wasn't questioning whaether there are reasons in favor of the strike zone being enlarged or altered, just the methodolgy of implementing the change by intstructing officials to do something that contradicts the rules.

The rules define a specific strike zone. If the consensus is that the strike zone prescribed in the rules is not working well or needs to be wider, wouldn't the appropriate thing be to change the rules rather than break or contradict them?

I know nobody would decide to award first base on 3 balls instead of 4 or call a batter out with 2 strikes instead of 3 because it seemed to work better or to move the game along, and I don't imagine that anyone would instruct that in a clinic.

I am just trying to understand why the approach is not to change the rule rather than circumvent it?

Actually, they do. It is not at all uncommon for leagues to have batters come to bat with a 1-1 count.

Here it is, again:

The strike zone is only defined the way it is because the armpits and knees are the physical focal points. However, a ball at the arm pits or knees on the inside corner and the high outside corner are difficult pitches that many players cannot hit.

This is understood in the softball world, even by the better coaches. Unfortunately, there are no other physical attributes on a batter that can be used to adjust the strike zone to hitable pitches, so it is handled through instruction and interpretation. Umpires are instructed to bring it down a little, up a little, and to allow the same "square area" for the pitcher, out a little. An inside or outside pitch, even a ball's width, is much more hitable just above the knees and below the armpits than an inside pitch across the plate at the armpits/knees. The adjustment gives the batter more hitable pitches while maintaining the same "square area" for the pitcher to hit for a strike.[quote]

<b>Hmmm... I have my doubts. If you were really a math teacher, you would know that the approximate value of pi is 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375 10582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706 79821480865132823066470938446095505822317253594081 28481117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381 96442881097566593344612847564823378678316527120190 91456485669234603486104543266482133936072602491412 73724587006606315588174881520920962829254091715364 36789259036001133053054882046652138414695194151160 94330572703657595919530921861173819326117931051185 48074462379962749567351885752724891227938183011949 </b>

A math professor at Princeton knows pi out to 1,000 places. So does his wife, who is also a math professor. In a strange coincidence, their son is gifted at math and got the highest scores in the country on the standardized tests his school administered.

I will now open myself up to criticism and admit that my zone is somewhat subjective and varies according to the level of play and even the situation. For example, last night a 14u player took a pitch a little high, fouled a pitch in the zone, took another pitch high, lined foul a pitch in the zone, and then checked her swing on a curve a few inches outside. Ball 3.

But I admit that if she had stood with the bat on her shoulder and watched strike 1 and strike 2 down the middle and then that curve a few inches outside, it would have been strike 3.

MLB, pitcher up. Stands like a statue with his bat on his shoulder for three pitches, two right down the pipe, the third one waist high and two inches outside. Is there an umpire who would not call that pitch strike 3?

Ted Williams up. Lines two balls foul and then shrugs off a waist-high pitch two inches outside. Is there an umpire who would call that pitch strike 3?

OK. Have at me.

Sure, why not? Big deal, Ted Williams.....you think he is incapable of freezing at the plate.....it's not like he's going to lose his head if you ring him up.......er, on second thought :)

I was thinking the same thing.

You are a good hitter so you get a smaller zone. You though are a crappy hitter so we're going to widen that zone up so you don't have to embarrass yourself too long.:D

The Zone-u-lator
 

OK, I admit it: my strike zone looks like a stop sign. Closer to the middle it is wider.

In most every situation (save a couple atrocious school ball games I might do) I will negotiate the width of my zone. If I call one between the letter and the armpits, or if I ever call one where the entire ball is not above the knee, I have erred.

Your zone may differ...and is slightly higher in many cases, especially east of the rockies :)

The strike zone is indeed defined in the rule book, just like the infield fly. But ordinary effort for Player A is NOT the same as ordinary effort for Player B. Could go on ad nauseum, but don't want to beat the dead horse any further...

SRW,
I have a name for the horse. I'd share it on the board, but many wouldn't understand.

Like IamMatt... I'm confused
 

As someone who only calls games when no "real" umpire can be had, I have enjoyed browsing this forum, and most of the posts, including in this thread.

I can understand some minor deviations from the "by the book" knees to armpits, edge to edge zone, as long as the strike zone is still pretty much a rectangle near the book definition. And I also understand subjective issues like the bat on the shoulder widening the strike zone.

But when I see umpires putting in writing that, as a matter of course, they have oval or octagonal strike zones because it's too hard to hit pitches in the corners, I get very confused:confused: , and not a little frustrated:mad:.

Do you think it's not hard to pitch into those same corners? How to you justify unilaterally changing the balance of the game like that?

Yeah, as you can probably guess... my daughter's a pitcher. :o

First you say you understand the deviations from the book strike zone and then obviously display that you don't. Before you start off on an eteamz-style, unknowledgable rant, you might want to actually be trained as an umpire.

This isn't something individual umpires just make up and post on discussion boards. The information comes from the ASA Umpire Manual (page 207), clinics and schools at the local, regional and national levels. The umpires are just doing what they are instructed, and to the best of my knowledge, at all levels in all associations!

First of all, the umpires that said they were trained to do something weren't (IIRC) the ones that described odd shapes, their deviations from pit/knee/plate weren't the ones I was decrying.

The posters that described the odd shapes implied these were personal preferences, using words like "I like," or "my strike zone" not "I was taught." Mike, your post described a square. Although the oval poster does, unfortunately, say he teaches this.

I do have the NFHS softball rules and umpires manual, but not here with me at the moment. Maybe I'm blocking out an unpleasant memory, but I remember nothing in there like what you're describing.

The fact that it takes two or three different books, most of which are either not available to the general public or at least difficult to obtain, FOR EACH ASSOCIATION, just to have the complete story is a seperate tirade. Is the ASA rulebook online? No. Is the ASA Umpire Manual available online (p 207 or otherwise)? No. Can it be ordered easily? My efforts so far to obtain either have failed.

It's like telling the police that you should ticket anyone who runs a yellow light, but putting in the drivers training book not to run a red light, but proceed with caution through a yellow.

Basically, I guess I've two separate issues, one of which you address:

1) As someone calling a game, I should be trained to do it right. I won't argue that point.

2) As a fan/parent, I have a problem with what amounts to be a secret cabal deciding that the rules will be interpreted in a way different from what is the explicit written, and commonly understood, version of them.

Not sure why that would be difficult. Assumably your efforts to locate them online lead you to www.asasoftball.com, and then to your local association contacts. Your state UIC should be glad to register you as an ASA umpire, which includes the Umpire Edition of the ASA rulebook (and the umpire manual).

[daffy duck] *mmwwhhahahahaha* [/daffy duck]



;)

I find it humorous too how different coaches react to the same pitch. One of the colleges near me often asks me to call some intersquad scrimmage games for them. I find my strike zone to be very similar to one described by Mike (maybe a little lower at the top of the zone :o ). When I call stikes on the outside corner the hitting coach goes ballistic while the pitching coach is ready to buy me dinner!

One thing I've found in umpiring is that strike zones are strike zones and everyone has one and they are all different. Some people can't see the outside of the plate as well as others. There are those that have trouble with balls at the knees. If they are consistant with their zone, most coaches don't complain too much. Other than my patent leather shoes, I get more compliments on my strike zone than anything. I just wish I could figure that darned pi thing out . . .:D