Catchers and the strike zone (FP)
 

Over on the eteamz coaches board, there is a post talking about how a certain coach trains catchers to "keep the pitch looking like a strike".

Personally, the actions of the catcher are one of the last things I look at to determine ball or strike. On most pitches, I'm looking at where and/or if the ball crosses the plate in the strike zone. I do track the ball all the way in to the catcher's glove, and there have been rare occasions where I have used the postion of the catcher's glove to help with the call.

Here is the link to the thread:

http://eteamz.active.com/fastpitch/b...cfm?id=1722486

Comments?

He made a comment about framing being an insult to umpires. I don't consider it an insult. The only thing I get out of it was that the catcher did not believe the pitch was a strike. I use that information the same way I would use information that the catcher did believe it was a strike.

He also was strongly against a catcher pulling a pitch into the strike zone. I thought he had some good points.

While the actions of the catch are one of the last things to look at, they are also one of the first. I do look at where the catcher sets up - before I drop into a set position.

I, too, thought the advice was sound.
I didn't care for the post that had the catcher moving to "center" the pitch.

I like calling strikes. If a catcher helps me do that more power to her. I agree with just about everything this guys said. There is nothing I dislike worse than a catcher who jerks pitches and he says not to do this. If a catcher sets up on the corner and never moves she is going to get the close corner pitch from me more often than not.

My question and the reason for starting this thread was more along the lines of:

How often do the actions of the catcher influence whether you call a ball or strike?

The coach on the other board seems to think that his teachings will result in more strikes being called and it seems that some of the other posters agree with him. Since I'm watching the ball and not the catcher, it seems to me that there is an awful lot of effort for minimal return.

Speaking for myself, I would say that 95% of the time, I have made my decision by the time the catcher gloves the ball. Granted, it is only fractions of a second prior to the catcher getting the ball, but my decision has been made. My concentration is on where the ball is when it gets in the vicinity of the strike zone. The catcher is getting very little, if any, of my attention. Is this how others have been trained, or do I need to readjust my thinking?

Oh, I dunno... it's easier to call 'em where the catcher's glove ends up. That way, you have fewer problems with the fans behind the backstop! :rolleyes:

Seriously, I'm with you. By the time the catcher is moving her glove around, my judgment has already been made. I give just as much credence to the catcher moving her glove into the zone as to the catcher holding the glove still forever. That would be: none - except mild annoyance from time to time; it would seem I am most annoyed when I actually agree with the call the catcher wants... don't know why that is! ;)

fOOD FOR THOUGHT
Batters right at back of box and ball is pitched and comes through zone over plate all of ball just above knee but by the time it gets to the batter it has dropped to below the knee
Either a slower pitcher or a drop ball
Catcher is well back and catches ball up of the ground .
A genuine strike that only you know or survival and call it a ball because the defense and offense and spectators think its a ball .

...And ?
...Still sounded like a strike.

I watch it all the way to the catcher.. there are some actions of a catcher that can cause me to lean towards/call a ball..

first off, its kinda embarrassing to call a marginal strike and see the ball go rolling away from the catcher, so I dont like to do it - and I've been known to answer "what was wrong with that one blue" with "it wasnt even catchable" when going ahead and calling a ball when I probably would have called a strike if caught.. or if I do call the strike - telling the catcher, "you know you make me look bad if you dont catch that one". "sorry blue!"

Moving the ball into the strike zone, well.. that means the catcher thought it was a ball and me too then.

those are a few of my thoughts.

Oh yeah, I forgot about the catcher's mitt/skill wording in the strike zone definition. :rolleyes:

You are on my track Wadeintothem .
Not to be rude or arrogant but it does depend on the level of play .
I Umpire top level mens games week in week out .
These are players who represent there countries in World Series .
For me to call strikes on marginal balls that get dropped or balls picked up off the ground I just wouldnt survive .
Now the way I call them I get no grief and havent for some years .

Hey, that reminds me, when a pitcher rolls her eyes my strike zone might change a little too. Man you eye roller types are irratating lol. But i'm sure you look great in sliding shorts and braids.

I agree with wadeintothem, at least at the higher levels the catcher does make a difference. It is a matter of survival if she catches it, more will beleive it a strike. With a good catcher you mention something like "man if you catch that I can get away with calling it a strike" now some will say that is giving the catcher a feeling that your zone is weak or you are guessing. I say that is having a good conversation with your best friend during the game. A good catcher will adjust and either bring up the pitch a little or she will make darn sure she catches the next one. I know technically that is not in the rules, so Cecil is technically correct, but if you have this small conversation early it makes thing much easier on everyone! And we are talking about 2 maybe 3 pitches a game....if the pitcher is smart she adjusts a little bit to my zone, out of 180 that we call (average of 89.6 pitches per game in college according to a study I read, so it is probably more in HS and youth) if you are 99% accurate you miss a couple a game!

Also the outside pitch, if the catcher moves her mitt I am going to have a talk with her, just her and I will know we talked, something like, "wow that was on the corner, but you know how bad it looks when I call that after you jerked your mitt inside? hold it still and I will bang that all day long" Again 1 or 2 pitches on a team(pitch and catch) that know what they are doing is all it takes. I notice it on girls that have a good curve, start inside and grows outside, if you call the plate (which I try to do :D ) by the time the ball gets to the catcher it might be a foot outside (still a strike....Ok maybe not :p ) if she holds, even though she caught it outside I know where it crossed the plate, and I will take the heat over her catching it outside vs her moving the mitt to "trick" me. Again maybe there aren't rules to support me, but on a pitch that close my judgement put it out of the zone if they move, or drop it and into the zone if they don't!

Thank you - thats exactly what I am talking about.

I want the catchers mindset to be - catch the ball, and Im not saying I dont call some that the catcher misses - Im saying it looks bad to call some marginal thing that the catcher couldnt keep a hold of.

Ring up a batter called X3 and the ball is a tad somewhere or the other and the catcher scurries off to retrieve the ball. that just looks bad.

As to a by the book strike zone, hell thats not even taught at clinics nor called by just about anyone above 10U- heck even the POE for strike zone doesnt discuss a by the rule strike zone - so I dont want to hear that at all and its bogus. I pitty the umpire that calls a mens fast pitch and rings up some guy on a pitch that screams acrossed the top of the armpits.. no one calls that, except cecil.

Strike zone is a guide line, then there are survivability techinques and things that make you credible as an umpire.