Strike Zone - How to call

[bradrhod]

I know this is controversial but I still have to ask; besides it is winter even in SoCal and this is a good time for this question.

A couple of years ago an umpire friend mentioned that ASA talks about a ‘currently’ called strike zone in their spring classes. Last year it seemed like the zone moved up to two balls above the knee and was widened to the outside allowing up to two balls off the plate on the outside corner.

Also, I have heard a non-ASA umpire tell a coach, I was not involved in the game, that “the strike zone is whatever I call”. This happened after 3 or 4 bad (IMHO) strike calls in a row, and the coach riding the umpire. Certainly the umpire was justified in reacting to the coach. Once you get this far with an umpire, you deserve what you get. However, the umpires statement got me thinking.

Finally, we have this umpire in our area. He is a really great guy. Has been involved in the game for near 50 years; is coming up on 70 years old; still volunteers entire weekends to umpire games; and he still calls an awesome game. All of us can only hope to have his resume and continued involvement when we get to his age. One thing, he cannot stand it when one team beats another by a lot of runs. He asks the score every inning (too old and losses track), and when run differential is 5 runs or so, you will see the strike zone change significantly. The winning team will get squeezed and the loosing team will get opened up. If the score happens to tighten up, then the old strike zone returns. Sometimes you get a new zone inning after inning. This has been going so long; only new people bother getting excited. Personally, I do not like his efforts to control the game because it confuses the young hitters, and that confusion can carry into other games. So far he has not changed the outcome of a game.

Of course as a coach/batter/pitcher it is a part of the job is to recognize the strike zone and work on adjusting. That has been part of the game for 200 years
(http://www.baseball-almanac.com/arti..._history.shtml). The part to me that is off a bit is that the ASA rule book is exact in stating the location of the strike zone. It really provides no room for adjustment. Yet ASA, I believe, teaches adjustment of the strike zone year to year.

STRIKE ZONE. When a batter assumes a natural batting stance adjacent to home plate, the strike zone is that space over any part of home plate between the batter’s:

• (Fast Pitch Only) Arm pits and the top of the knees.

• (Slow Pitch Only) Back shoulder and the front knee.

When MLB actually changes the strike zone, they do it officially in the rule book. We do not allow the difference between what is called on the field and what is in the rule book in any other area of the game.

Few questions:
How should the strike zone be called, per the rule book or with allowances? Should ASA (or any association) actually be making a rule change to adjust the strike zone?

[JEL]

In calling balls and strikes,it is generally most accepted to bring the pitch down or up into the strike zone, and widen it out, making sure to give a good corner. The bench and spectators can see whether the pitch is too high or too low, however, they can not tell whether it passed over the plate.

The strike zone IS whatever is called! You just gotta be consistant. A 10U "C" class rec strike zone ain't gonna look like a D1 zone. I had a JV game about 2 months ago where niether team had a pitcher. The coaches tried everybody. In the second inning, (we only got in three) when a batter came up I would tell them if you can reach it with the bat, you better swing because I'm calling it! Very few were "reachable" even on tiptoes!

There has to be some lattitude given to the umpire. After all, balls and strikes are a "judgement call" The definition that ASA gives works, but it is the umpires judgement as to where the ball crossed, and also what is a "natural batting stance?" There are also some games where the coaches will ask to open the zone (story above).

A good strike zone (IMO) will also not be learned nor dictated by a book. Guidelines may be drawn, but a good strike zone will only come with experience, and much self evaluation.

You said about the old guy---"So far he has not changed the outcome of a game."---- sounds like he may have a pretty good grasp!

[IamMatt]

I think you will get consensus on "Less Filling" vs "Tastes Great" sooner than you will ever get consensus on this issue.

Recent thread on the topic.

[bigsig]

I've had a few JV games just like that. The only thing I would add is that between innings, before I change the strike zone, I will go to both coaches and tell them to warn the girls that the strike zone is going to get bigger and to swing at anything close.

The coaches have always appreciated this and I've never had a problem.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by bradrhod

Also, I have heard a non-ASA umpire tell a coach, I was not involved in the game, that “the strike zone is whatever I call”. This happened after 3 or 4 bad (IMHO) strike calls in a row, and the coach riding the umpire. Certainly the umpire was justified in reacting to the coach.

Maybe, but I don't like what he said. All that I've found necessary to say is, "Coach, are you aware that arguing balls and strikes is against the rules?" That will usually put an end to it without the antagonism and bravado of your friends response.

...and he still calls an awesome game. ...One thing, he cannot stand it when one team beats another by a lot of runs. ...when run differential is 5 runs or so, you will see the strike zone change significantly. The winning team will get squeezed and the loosing team will get opened up.

IOW, he cheats to to help the struggling team. Personally, I wouldn't call this "an awesome game" calling technique. My issue is not his opening up of the zone, but the opening for one team and squeezing for the other. Why limit this favortism to just the strike zone?

So far he has not changed the outcome of a game.

He's been doing this for 50 years and NEVER changed the outcome of a game? I ain't buying it.

That has been part of the game for 200 years

Both you and Davey Johnson need to work on your math.

The part to me that is off a bit is that the ASA rule book is exact in stating the location of the strike zone. It really provides no room for adjustment.

The rule book provides a reliable, consistent point of reference for the umpire, and then the umpire manual instructs how to interpret the rule.

Yet ASA, I believe, teaches adjustment of the strike zone year to year.

Year to year? Really?

When MLB actually changes the strike zone, they do it officially in the rule book.

I guess you don't actually watch too many MLB games.

We do not allow the difference between what is called on the field and what is in the rule book in any other area of the game.

Really? Don't you see this variation in just about all of the judgment calls?

How should the strike zone be called, per the rule book or with allowances?

Per the rule book with the official interpretations, training, and experience. It also needs to be adjusted to the age and skill of the players, but any adjustment needs to apply to both teams in a given game

Should ASA (or any association) actually be making a rule change to adjust the strike zone?

No need, IMO.

[wadeintothem]

I'd say I agree with much of Dakota above..

I do change my strike zone for skill level.. for instance, in the early part of the year I am working a rec league and I wont be as tight as I will be when I start working the 16 and 18 A/G travel ball/mens FP.

I'd say at the upper levels, For ME, I've found everyone is more appreciative of a tighter strike zone (ie. less trouble).. if you are ringing up people at a arm pit high pitch a storm is coming.

To lay out every aspect of what I do is probably long and boring.. but I do adjust a little on the 3-0 .. 0-2 , but I dont think I do it as much as other umpires I see. "Adjust" may not be the right word.. perhaps - less willing to give the marginal in those instances.

I dont change my zone based on score/batter/pitcher once the game is started. Any decisions I make as to how I will call a game are made pregame/pre tourney - then I try to stay consistant. I do believe a coach/pitcher/batter need to be able to "work" - to do that they need their umpire to be in consistant in what they are calling so they can make the appropriate adjustments.

In general, If forced to describe my zone - I give some outside, will call the knee, tight on the inside, about a softball and 1/2 above the belly button high.


While the rulebook lays out one strike zone rule, then the POE changes it a little, and the clinics may even alter that alittle more.. I think it is a "right" of the umpire to develop a zone for himself within reason, then his duty to stay consistant with that for the game. If he/she learns something knew/wants to try something different.. try it out on the next game.. and continue to grow and develope their strike zone..

i.e. it is not an exact science. It is a learned skill.

[gsf23]

Whatever you decide to do, just be consistent with it. No matter what the score, what inning, what count, be CONSISTENT. A pitch that is called a strike should always be called a strike, not called a strike only if one team is ahead, or the game is getting late. About the only time I would ever change my zone in a game is if both pitchers are struggling to find to zone, then I MAY open it up a bit to try to get them into a rhythm.

No matter how awful a coach thinks your zone is, if it is consistently awful, a good coach and team will be able to adjust.

[IRISHMAFIA]

What is the big thing some umpires have about demanding the pitcher to be perfect by enforcing a tight zone.

We all know umpires that will tell you they make the pitcher throw through a tight zone. My question is, why would they do that?

Hell, I'd rather see the batter use that expensive piece of equipment instead of standing there and polishing it on their shoulder strap.

[bluezebra]

Don't rush the season. It's not winter until Dec. 21st.

Bob

[CLBuffalo]

Originally Posted by bluezebra

Don't rush the season. It's not winter until Dec. 21st.

Bob

This morning in my part of SC it was 20 degrees. Yesterday it was 22 degrees but with a strong wind so the wind chill factor made it 15 degrees. Tomorrow morning it will warm up to 31 degrees. The book definition may be Dec. 21st but it is winter now!

[tcannizzo]

Which most closely describes you?

a.) Pitcher's Umpire
b.) Hitter's Umpire
c.) Other (explain)

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

What is the big thing some umpires have about demanding the pitcher to be perfect by enforcing a tight zone.

We all know umpires that will tell you they make the pitcher throw through a tight zone. My question is, why would they do that?

Hell, I'd rather see the batter use that expensive piece of equipment instead of standing there and polishing it on their shoulder strap.

Generally speaking..

I have found for me a tighter zone is the path of least resistance. No way do I have a "tight-coffee can zone" - but in general terms, if you sit down batter after batter (as I have done) with a wide zone you have more trouble (ie complaints/whining) than if you squeeze a little. I think people have their mind trained to MLB - so a little lower is fine.. high stuff, no way - that ticks people off.

A little outside is fine.. if you let the good pitchers jam them inside or work these tough to hit areas, they will stay there all day and its counter productive to the "bat on the shoulder" argument; which I tend to agree with. Generally, a looser zone with good pitchers doesnt mean they will be more hittable, it just means you will get more foul balls and called 3K IMO.

Dont construe this to mean me advocating a "tight zone" .. but more arguing against a real loose zone, a little tight.

I've tried all kinds of zones working this or that and for me, I think erroring on the side of the tighter zone is better than just ringing them up. I've not found at any level above rec league that a loose zone = more hitting. Good pitchers figure it out quick and dont give that batter a dang thing to hit.

[wadeintothem]

I'll give you an example that pops to mind.. Marissa Drewery who just signed with Cal Bears from the Sorcerers/Oakdale HS who I have umpired a few times.

That girl works it low inside and outside.

You'll see it on TV I'm sure. She is already virtually unhittable and its pretty rare to even see a hit. If I gave her that low inside by having a loose zone, that doesnt mean you suddenly have batter that can hit, it just means shes going to pitch in that unhittable super low inside spot all day.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

I'll give you an example that pops to mind.. Marissa Drewery who just signed with Cal Bears from the Sorcerers/Oakdale HS who I have umpired a few times.

That girl works it low inside and outside.

You'll see it on TV I'm sure. She is already virtually unhittable and its pretty rare to even see a hit. If I gave her that low inside by having a loose zone, that doesnt mean you suddenly have batter that can hit, it just means shes going to pitch in that unhittable super low inside spot all day.

I wasn't referring to calling the rulebook defined strike zone, I was referring to the umpires that force a pitcher to put the majority or entire ball over the plate.

However, if a team rather strike out and bicth (sp intentional) instead of starting to swing at the pitches you are calling strikes, the bench is just where they belong. "Whining" in not part of "playing the game."

[SRW]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

In general, If forced to describe my zone - I give some outside, will call the knee, tight on the inside, about a softball and 1/2 above the belly button high.

Your batters show you their belly button every at-bat?