The "Strike Zone"

Discussion topic:

Many umpires now call balls/strikes by WHERE and HOW the catcher catches the ball. This leads to several observations, but, before I chime in with my observations, I'd like to hear from the crowd.

1. Is this right?

2. Why did this practice start?

3. What are the advantages, if any?

4. What are the disadvantages, if any?

Obviously, I have my own opinion (I always do), but everyone respond and try and change my mind.

 

I think the way the strike zone has changed over the years is ridiculous. The tendency to call strikes on pitches that are from the waist down to the knees and from the inside edge to 4 inches off the outside edge, (especially with two strikes on the batter) is not the strike zone defined in the rule book.

How a catcher catches the ball is irrelevant to where the ball was when it passed over or by the plate.

Here's a radical idea for you. Replace the homeplate umpire with two "line judges" like in tennis. The one judge positions himself above homeplate and the other to the side and facing the batter. The judge above the plate signals when the ball crosses over any part of the plate. And the side judge signals whenever the ball passes between the batter's knees and chest. If both signal, then it's a strike. If only one or neither signal, then it's a ball. How simple. And how accurate.

The next logical step is to replace the judges with video cameras and have the judges monitor the images on a TV screen.

And the next logical step is to feed both video signals through a computer that is programmed to detect when the ball passes through the specific strike zone for the batter at the plate.

When that happens we'll have a nice consistent strike zone for all batters and pitchers.

And you know what the sad part about this is? It could be implemented today, using today's technology. You see something similar to this with ESPN's strike zone box (or whatever they call it) to show you where the pitch actually was in relation to the strike zone immediately after the pitch was thrown.

I have no patience or tolerance for inconsistent umpiring, or consistently wrong umpiring. It is the one complaint I hear at EVERY level of baseball, from Little League through High School, College, and the Major Leagues. I think it should be corrected.

Boy that felt good to get off my chest!

Any comments?

 

As I heard one fan so eloquently put it the other night at a high school baseball game when the umpire obviously made a terrible call.... "flip the plate over, and read the directions!"

 

I thought I would re-post this

Confessions of a HS umpire
I love this guy's honesty:


Although never having attended a "pro school", I am a frequent attendee to clinics and a many year veteran of HS and youth baseball. I am a low ball, inside umpire. This was confirmed to me based on a videotape of a simulated inning.

I always thought that I had a consistant strike zone. That being said, I feel my zone from from the plate up is solid, all 17 inches, and that my plate has corners. Now maybe that it is that I am only 5'7", but it is clear to me that when I am in my natural stance, I call a strike on a pitch that is low when the batter is taller.

Now, I have made an effort to be more aware of the position of the batters zone when he takes his initial stance, but I know that I am more apt to call the low chest to below the knee a strike.

If there is a silver lining to this, I have been told that I do not vary from this from inning to inning, which gives the batter an opportunity to get a feel for my zone. My feel for the strike zone is a part of my game I try and work on every year.

 

Maybe we should put robots out in the field to make the plays, too. And send them up to the plate to hit. Heck, maybe we should just play the games on our computers -- no need to allow human error to affect the outcome. :sarcastic No offense rjrdad, I know the frustration well, but in my opinion improving performance is the answer, not using technology for umpires.

I'm not a fan of poor umpiring, but from where I sit the players and the coaches are still making far more errors than the umps. Baseball is a game played by humans, coached by humans, watched by humans, scored by humans and umped by humans. That's how it should be. Sure, the performance of all those humans can be improved.

If the umps never make mistakes, who will we blame our losses on? Who will we scream at? As much as I hate to admit it, we need those SOBs. But there are several of them I sure would like to see go call somewhere else .... RJRdad, I'm sure glad to hear we don't have all the bad ones here in Charlotte.

Calling balls and strikes is not that difficult behind the catcher :backstab: -- although some umps sure make it seem hard. It is much more difficult, however, from the dugout, the right field stands, etc.

AS to NC's questions -- I don't think it is new -- it has been around forever. Contrary to popular opinion, the umps want to get the calls right and they want people to think they got it right. It is the latter point that makes the catcher so important.

I love to watch a good catcher with soft hands frame the marginal pitch to get a strike. No, it shouldn't matter where, how or even whether the catcher catches the ball, but it does matter very much on all the close pitches -- because the catcher makes the pitch look like a strike and how the pitch looks is important to the ump. If the catcher doesn't make it look like a strike, no way will he get the call. If the catcher moves his mitt, rather than sticking the pitch and leaning or slightly rotating the mitt, he won't get the pitches from a good ump, either. If the catcher lets the pitch ride to his body, rather than catching it out front, he won't get as many calls either. I've heard some good pitchers say that particular catchers get them an average of one or more extra strikes an inning. That's 7+ strikes over the course of a high school game -- a little more important I'd say than whether that catcher has a 2.0 or a 2.2 POP time.

I also like to hear stories about catchers working the umpire -- some great conversations go on between catchers and umpires. They can have an impact, too. I know catchers who try to create a friendly relationship early :smooch:, then constantly ask where a marginal pitch was. "Was that low or outside, blue?" Do you want it a little higher or in a little more?" Amazing how often that next pitch in the same spot is called a strike. They also can help the situation when the ump is ticked at the coach -- "Don't worry about him, blue, he's just blowin off steam. You ought to hear him yellin at us." That one can even get a chuckle --- AND the next close pitch.

Human umps, who make human errors, are a great part of baseball, even when they blow the call. And, by the way, there are a lot of very good umpires out there who love the game of baseball and umpire to stay a part of it, not for the money. We all need to remember to always praise :notworthy and thank a good ump for a job well done. Usually that's the ump you didn't notice out there all night.
:aorangeha

 

I was talking to an umpire last week who told me he couldn't sleep for 2 nights thinking about a Hr he ruled fair....kept asking himself "did I make the right call?"...I told him " No...not get some sleep"

 

I've seen a few umps determine whether a pitch was "high enough" to be a strike by whether a catcher "turns his glove over" to catch it. Should the technique of the catcher determine the outcome of a pitch???

 

That's because we'll all scream at him if he calls a pitch a strike when the catcher turned his mitt over. Also, if the catcher can't turn the top of the mitt over the ball when he catches it , it's too high. Again -- that's because the catcher made it look too high.

 

The technique of a catcher can determine a ball but rarely a strike

 

DB, spoken like a true catcher's dad. Great post.