Strike Zone

[mudder]

I seem to be one of the only umpires in my association who will call the high strike. I don't call it at the letters but just below (1" or 2"). I know by the book this is a strike, but we know nobody calls it by the book.

No other umpires in my assoc., that I observe, will call a pitch even close to this height a strike (13-16 yr olds). Nobody complains when you call a pitch 3-5" off the plate a strike, but they complain when its high. I guess its the old "from the bench/stands they can see up & down, but they can't see side to side"

To me its a strike, and a hittable pitch. But I'm tired of getting flack from everyone on this. Should I just avoid the grief, conform and stop calling the high strike, a strike?

[lustersilk]

Nobody complains when you call a pitch 3-5" off the plate a strike

They do around here.

[AugieDonatelli]

I seem to be one of the only umpires in my association who will call the high strike. I don't call it at the letters but just below (1" or 2"). I know by the book this is a strike, but we know nobody calls it by the book.

No other umpires in my assoc., that I observe, will call a pitch even close to this height a strike (13-16 yr olds). Nobody complains when you call a pitch 3-5" off the plate a strike, but they complain when its high. I guess its the old "from the bench/stands they can see up & down, but they can't see side to side"

To me its a strike, and a hittable pitch. But I'm tired of getting flack from everyone on this. Should I just avoid the grief, conform and stop calling the high strike, a strike?
I personally don't like really high strikes. I don't want to encourage pitchers to throw it, and batters who swing at these high pitches develop bad hitting habits and start chasing pitches that are too high. Also, these high strikes end up getting fouled back into masks, collar bones etc., more than lower ones do.

Before all of this hoo-hah about emphasizing the high strike in MLB (which went over like a lead balloon [not to be confused with Led Zeppelin, who absolutely rock :)]), it was generally a small zone top to bottom (belt to knee) and a wide zone in and out (a couple balls on either side of plate. The batters adapted to it over the years, and each umpire had his own zone. Now, with Questec, the umpires are forced to adapt to a more standardized zone, which I think really sucks. It used to be, "hey, this umpire calls them a little low, so watch the low pitch." This meant that players would scout umpires and adjust to each umpire's particular zone, and it was an integral part of the game. When Eric Gregg was umpiring the plate, the hitters knew that they had better be swinging at just about everything.

I think that the bottom of the letters is as high as I would call at any level. HS varsity I call about one ball width above the belt. Any higher and the coaches and batters start moaning and groaning.

[nopachunts]

I guess its the old "from the bench/stands they can see up & down, but they can't see side to side".

A lot of coaches will work off of how the catcher caught the pitch. If the catcher had to go higher than the shoulder or had to turn the mitt over to catch a pitch, most likely a ball. If the catcher had to go outside either knee or had to dive, most likely a ball. Dugouts can see north and south, but not east or west. Use to your advantage, YMMV.

[BrianC14]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mudder
Nobody complains when you call a pitch 3-5" off the plate a strike

Quote:
Originally Posted by lustersilk
They do around here.

Yeah? A baseball (which is pretty much 3" in diameter) hits the outside edge, and coaches complain?
Depending on the level I'm working, even TWO baseballs off the plate are going to get called.

And if they whine? Well, you know what to do..... ;)

[bobjenkins]

But I'm tired of getting flack from everyone on this. Should I just avoid the grief, conform and stop calling the high strike, a strike?

If "everyone" complains your zone is too high / low / tight / big / etc, then it is- for that legaue and that level.

Also, maybe you're not seeing what everyone else is seeing.

[mudder]

A lot of coaches will work off of how the catcher caught the pitch.

I know I get this all the time from coaches, they even approach me and ask if their F2 is setting up right or wrong, or whatever, when they don't like my zone, and I respond its irrelevant where the pitch was caught by F2, its where it crossed the plate, and I don't care where the F2 sets up as long as he's in the catcher's box

[lustersilk]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mudder
Nobody complains when you call a pitch 3-5" off the plate a strike

Quote:
Originally Posted by lustersilk
They do around here.

Yeah? A baseball (which is pretty much 3" in diameter) hits the outside edge, and coaches complain?
Depending on the level I'm working, even TWO baseballs off the plate are going to get called.

And if they whine? Well, you know what to do..... ;)

Maybe I'm confusing things. I consider "off the plate" to mean the edge of the ball and the edge of the plate. So to me 3" off the plate means 3" between the edge of the ball and the edge of the plate.

And if they whine, well I usually smile inside and ignore the rest. You're only gonna please half of the people out there anyway.

[mudder]

Maybe I'm confusing things. I consider "off the plate" to mean the edge of the ball and the edge of the plate. So to me 3" off the plate means 3" between the edge of the ball and the edge of the plate.

Thats what I meant as well.

[nopachunts]

I don't care where the F2 sets up as long as he's in the catcher's box

Be careful of the catcher's box. The catcher's box in OBR and OBR based rule sets is significantly different from a LL catcher's box in 12 and under.

[scumpire]

The reason you don't want to call the high strike is b/c when pitchers leave pitches up in the zone it is usually a mistake. Pitchers are taught to work down because pitchers that throw chest high fast balls and hang curve balls get rocked. So you don't want pitchers to get rewarded for leaving the ball up and you don't want hitters getting used to that being called a strike b/c they will start teeing off. I would definitely start calling shin burners before I started grabbing stuff that was left up.

Also, a lot of guys are quick to quote the definition of the strike zone and leave out the most important part of it. The sentence after it describes how high and low the zone is says,” The zone is determined from the batter's stance as he is prepared to swing at a pitched ball." So what that means is once he takes his stride it’s the hollow beneath the kneecap to the midpoint between the shoulders and belt. So usually, once a hitter has taken his stride the zone will drop a bit lower compared to when he was just standing in the box. Everyone always said Ricky Henderson's zone was small because he crouched down low in the box but that didn't matter b/c once he took his stride his zone was pretty much the same as everyone else.

[Dragon29]

I know I get this all the time from coaches, they even approach me and ask if their F2 is setting up right or wrong, or whatever, when they don't like my zone, and I respond its irrelevant where the pitch was caught by F2, its where it crossed the plate, and I don't care where the F2 sets up as long as he's in the catcher's box

mudder,

The proper response to a coach who asks that question is, "Coach, we're not discussing the strike zone today."

It's a way of arguing balls & strikes without actually arguing balls & strikes - don't let them get away with it. Let them coach their catcher; it's not your job to help them.

[heyblue26]

mudder,

The proper response to a coach who asks that question is, "Coach, we're not discussing the strike zone today."

It's a way of arguing balls & strikes without actually arguing balls & strikes - don't let them get away with it. Let them coach their catcher; it's not your job to help them.

Great response lets playball.

[alex7]

Mudder, I would talk to your association's evaluators and go by what they say. Sure, the thoughts of other umpires is important, but not nearly as much as the evaluators and assignor.

My evaluator instructed me to call the high strike (sounds like yours, between the letters and belt) at the same level you're working with (freshman ball, middle-school ball) in order to keep games moving along. Once in a while you'll get a look from a coach that's used to a varsity zone, but for the most part, coaches here don't mind more strikes called at that level. They don't want to burn through 4 pitchers every game and stay out there 3 hours anymore than we do.

JV and up though, I'd stick to maybe one ball above the waist.

[Tim_C]

"JV and up though, I'd stick to maybe one ball above the waist."

Please, please, please DO NOT take this advice.

The one ball above the waist is the wrong view of the high end of a strike zone.

At the high school level it is encouraged nationally to call the bottom of the letters OR the arm pit (just below the hitters elbows).

Even at D1 (PAC-10 and WCC) umpires are asked to call the higher strike.

DO NOT CALL ONE BALL ABOVE THE BELT.

You are doing a disservice to the game.

[Pete_Booth]

To me its a strike, and a hittable pitch. But I'm tired of getting flack from everyone on this. Should I just avoid the grief, conform and stop calling the high strike, a strike?

Forget about the book definition of the strike zone. IMO, that is simply a reference point.

The strike zone is that which is accepted in the leagues we service.

Also, the strike zone as defined in the rule book does not differentiate by age group.

You cannot expect some modified HS F1 to have the same control or command of the strike zone as Santana or Halliday.

Watch the other umpires in this league and if 3 ball widths is accepted but the high strike isn't then so be it. The game is not about us it is for the participants.

Pete Booth

[AugieDonatelli]

At the high school level it is encouraged nationally to call the bottom of the letters OR the arm pit (just below the hitters elbows).


The bottom of the letters is nowhere near as high as the armpits. The bottom of the letters is much closer to the bottom of the hitter's elbows, which are far below the armpits on a normal human physique, unless they hold the bat like Carl Yaztremski. Cripes, now we're back to armpits? How Little League is that?:rolleyes:

[Tim_C]

As always Steve trying to get a rise:

Not gonna happen Captain.

We teach just what I documented statewide in Oregon for high school play . . .

:-}

[AugieDonatelli]

I'm not trying to get a rise out of you, I'm pointing out the fact that the bottom of the letters is not as high as the armpits. I have never seen the bottom of the uniform letters as high as the armpits. The mid-point between the armpits and the belt is where the "high strike" should be called. If you want to call it higher in Oregon, go right ahead. We will continue to call strikes the way they should be called, and not succumb to pressure to do otherwise. We would get crucified if we called the armpits in varsity ball.

I merely disagreed with you. What would cause you to think I was trying to get a rise? I don't post to get rises, you have me confused with PWL. I post to inform, to ask a question, or to make a joke to entertain. Those are the only 3 reasons I post. I don't start flame wars, post just to call names (unless someone provokes me), or to get a "rise" out of someone.

[mudder]

So there seems to be no consensus, but generally most lean to not calling the high strike, and because it seems to be generally accepted in my assoc. that the top of the zone is 1 or 2 balls above the belt, I guess thats what I should do.

Its an age old question and I've heard all the reasons why and why not, but why can't the baseball thinktanks get this figured out, if we're not supposed to call the high strike then just change the OBR strike zone to what is "generally accepted" to be a strike. I mean make a clear zone and everyone sticks to it for all levels, with exceptions for younger kids of course.

Right now its a moving target. Its like the NBA players showing up for a game everynight not knowing what the size the basket is going to be! You learn to adjust as the game goes on but why should you have to!

[lustersilk]

Hey Mudder,

I don't have a lot of experience or anything, but IMHO, I think you're overthinking this one. A good strike zone developes from many aspects, and it usually gets better with age. You can kind of sense from the reaction of a season's worth of F1s, F2s and batters when you're doing a good job and when you're not (I know I'm going to get blasted for this comment, but so be it).

My advice is this, stick to the same age group for a while and concentrate on being consistant. Then start tweaking your zone based upon all the information available (peer evaluation, constant chirping, too many walks, etc). Don't use one game as your baseline, take your time and it will work itself out. Post game as much as possible and get feedback from fellow umpires.

In the mean time just be consistant and don't forget to have fun.

[Pete_Booth]

You learn to adjust as the game goes on but why should you have to!

Because it's NOT our game.

You are a house painter. You get a call from a customer to come paint their house.

They tell you to paint 1/2 of the wall in a poca-dot fashion but paint the other half Purple.

You have 2 choices.

Accept the job
Decline the job

Same with the strike zone.

In a nutshell the 'customers" determine how they want the strike zone to be called. if this particular league doesn't like the high zone but has no problem with 3-4 ball widths over the outside edge so be it.

It's like ground rules. I once did a league in which DBT was only about 10ft. past first base. Virtually every over-throw went into DBT. The ground rule for this league was 1 base PERIOD. First play by infielder was 1 base from TOP (meaning runner stayed at first base) If F1 stepped back off pitcher's plate and threw to first for a pick-off and ball went into DBT. R1 gets second only. etc. etc.

now we all know that is against the rules, HOWEVER, that's what this league wanted and if you wanted to work for this league and get paid then you accepted their ground rule.

Pete Booth

[Tim_C]

mudder:

I have no idea where you are but I know of no group that calls only 1 or 2 balls above the belt.

Even Augie will tell you that.

[BrianC14]

mudder:

I have no idea where you are but I know of no group that calls only 1 or 2 balls above the belt.

Even Augie will tell you that.

Tim, come on now!
1 or 2 above the belt?

National League, circa 1974. ;)

[bobjenkins]

I have no idea where you are but I know of no group that calls only 1 or 2 balls above the belt.

I always get confused by descriptions such as this.

The ball is about 3" in diameter. So, "2 balls above the belt" is "6" above the belt." If you (or anyone using that phrase) means that "any part of the ball passes 6" above the waist", then that might be a pretty good top of the zone (depending on the level and the league -- I personally think it's a little tight still). If you mean "the entire ball must be less than 6" above the belt," then I agree it's too tight for all the levels I do.

[heyblue26]

Tim, come on now!
1 or 2 above the belt?

National League, circa 1974. ;)

I would say that is going back a little in time National League 1974 remember the strike zone has only been changed maybe 3 times since it was established. The strike zone is established or determined from the batter's natural stance as he/she is prepared to swing at a pitched ball. So if that 3" baseball sphere passes thru the zone that it is established its a strike behind the plate w/John Mc sherry I think explains it very well.

[BrianC14]

I would say that is going back a little in time National League 1974 remember the strike zone has only been changed maybe 3 times since it was established. The strike zone is established or determined from the batter's natural stance as he/she is prepared to swing at a pitched ball. So if that 3" baseball sphere passes thru the zone that it is established its a strike behind the plate w/John Mc sherry I think explains it very well.

You're right - as I recall, the NL strike zone - what they called, not what was written - was more like 1 or 2 BELOW the belt. ;)

[AugieDonatelli]

You're right - as I recall, the NL strike zone - what they called, not what was written - was more like 1 or 2 BELOW the belt. ;)You are correct, nothing above the belt was a strike, and that's how it was when I was learning. Even at the high school level, coaches would scream and holler, "Get it down, Blue!!" every time you called a pitch above the belt a strike.

It wasn't until recently that all this talk about "calling the high strike" came back into vogue. The zone used to resemble the "book" strike zone turned on its side, with very wide edges (see Glavine, Smoltz, Avery) and short top to bottom. Now, with all the emphasis being placed (erroneously and inappropriately, IMO) on raising the strike zone, along with Questec and Pitch Trax and all the other monitoring systems in place, the zone has reverted back to the "book" zone again. You no longer get those pitches that are 2 balls off the corner, and hitters are forced to swing at pitches that are high. Usually, those high pitches are mistakes anyway, and end up in the bleachers as home runs, or get fouled straight back into umpires' masks or collar bone areas.

[robbyrudd455]

You are correct, nothing above the belt was a strike, and that's how it was when I was learning. Even at the high school level, coaches would scream and holler, "Get it down, Blue!!" every time you called a pitch above the belt a strike.

It wasn't until recently that all this talk about "calling the high strike" came back into vogue. The zone used to resemble the "book" strike zone turned on its side, with very wide edges (see Glavine, Smoltz, Avery) and short top to bottom. Now, with all the emphasis being placed (erroneously and inappropriately, IMO) on raising the strike zone, along with Questec and Pitch Trax and all the other monitoring systems in place, the zone has reverted back to the "book" zone again. You no longer get those pitches that are 2 balls off the corner, and hitters are forced to swing at pitches that are high. Usually, those high pitches are mistakes anyway, and end up in the bleachers as home runs, or get fouled straight back into umpires' masks or collar bone areas.

It seems like every year I always hear players complain about "Man, I don't understand why umpires will call a pitch 8 inches off the plate a strike, but one right down the middle over his stomach a ball."

I tend to agree that the recent emphasis of the high strike is a good thing. I think that pitch right above or through the belly button is a hittable pitch. The rulebook top of the zone, right under the pecks, is a little tougher to get, however.

But I do call that one above the belt a strike. Pitchers need to make money too.

[trubblmaiker]

As a coach, I teach my kids there are four strike zones...the hitter's, the pitcher's, the ump's, and the book, and only one never changes and it is the least important. The hitter and pitcher must change their strike zones according to the count, situation, and the ump's zone that day. Umpires are constantly praised for being consistent, but it is my experience that they will change the zone according to the score, (lopsided game it gets bigger against winning team), the pitcher (if he continues to pinpoint the same spot low and away he will start to get that call later in the game), and the hitter (if he is up there with his bat on his shoulder and working a walk without swinging, the zone gets bigger).

If the strike zone is in the shape of a rectangle 20" wide from hollow beneath the knee to somewhere just above the navel, it is actually bulged rectangle on three sides. Nobody gets both corners of say low AND away...but a pitch down the middle may get called a strike a little lower than a pitch that low on the outer corner. A pitch on the outer half may get called two balls out if it's thigh high but not knee cap high. The only side that does not bulge is the top side it seems. That ump will not call a strike at the bottom of the letters if it's on either corner or right down the middle....and that is wrong. The top border of the strike zone should have the same bulging border as the other 3 sides...I can understand calling a pitch on the outside or inside corner solar plexis high a ball, but if the pitch crosses the heart of the plate even with the bread basket, (the soft spot where the rib cage and sternum ends at the diaphragm) it can easily be hit out of the park, it's a power pitch...how can it NOT be a called strike if taken?

[AugieDonatelli]

As a coach, I teach my kids there are four strike zones...the hitter's, the pitcher's, the ump's, and the book, and only one never changes and it is the least important. The hitter and pitcher must change their strike zones according to the count, situation, and the ump's zone that day. Umpires are constantly praised for being consistent, but it is my experience that they will change the zone according to the score, (lopsided game it gets bigger against winning team), the pitcher (if he continues to pinpoint the same spot low and away he will start to get that call later in the game), and the hitter (if he is up there with his bat on his shoulder and working a walk without swinging, the zone gets bigger).

If the strike zone is in the shape of a rectangle 20" wide from hollow beneath the knee to somewhere just above the navel, it is actually bulged rectangle on three sides. Nobody gets both corners of say low AND away...but a pitch down the middle may get called a strike a little lower than a pitch that low on the outer corner. A pitch on the outer half may get called two balls out if it's thigh high but not knee cap high. The only side that does not bulge is the top side it seems. That ump will not call a strike at the bottom of the letters if it's on either corner or right down the middle....and that is wrong. The top border of the strike zone should have the same bulging border as the other 3 sides...I can understand calling a pitch on the outside or inside corner solar plexis high a ball, but if the pitch crosses the heart of the plate even with the bread basket, (the soft spot where the rib cage and sternum ends at the diaphragm) it can easily be hit out of the park, it's a power pitch...how can it NOT be a called strike if taken?
I think you have mistaken this site for a "let's criticize umpires site." Don't you think we hear enough horseshit like you are spewing as it is? This is a site by umpires, for umpires. Coaches are welcome, but we don't need a lecture about how we should umpire from someone who doesn't umpire.

[KenGibes]

As a coach, I teach my kids there are four strike zones...the hitter's, the pitcher's, the ump's, and the book, and only one never changes and it is the least important. The hitter and pitcher must change their strike zones according to the count, situation, and the ump's zone that day. Umpires are constantly praised for being consistent, but it is my experience that they will change the zone according to the score, (lopsided game it gets bigger against winning team), the pitcher (if he continues to pinpoint the same spot low and away he will start to get that call later in the game), and the hitter (if he is up there with his bat on his shoulder and working a walk without swinging, the zone gets bigger).

If the strike zone is in the shape of a rectangle 20" wide from hollow beneath the knee to somewhere just above the navel, it is actually bulged rectangle on three sides. Nobody gets both corners of say low AND away...but a pitch down the middle may get called a strike a little lower than a pitch that low on the outer corner. A pitch on the outer half may get called two balls out if it's thigh high but not knee cap high. The only side that does not bulge is the top side it seems. That ump will not call a strike at the bottom of the letters if it's on either corner or right down the middle....and that is wrong. The top border of the strike zone should have the same bulging border as the other 3 sides...I can understand calling a pitch on the outside or inside corner solar plexis high a ball, but if the pitch crosses the heart of the plate even with the bread basket, (the soft spot where the rib cage and sternum ends at the diaphragm) it can easily be hit out of the park, it's a power pitch...how can it NOT be a called strike if taken?

The strike zone is where the umpire is calling strikes today. Plain and simple.

[bobjenkins]

how can it NOT be a called strike if taken?

Like this: "Ball"

Glad I could be of help.

[BrianC14]

I think you have mistaken this site for a "let's criticize umpires site." Don't you think we hear enough horseshit like you are spewing as it is? This is a site by umpires, for umpires. Coaches are welcome, but we don't need a lecture about how we should umpire from someone who doesn't umpire.

Keeping with the baseball theme of this site, this is a walk-off grand slam.

Maybe Mr. Trubb would rather have the umpires sit in the dugout, or stand in the 3B coaches box, since it's pretty clear (to him, anyway) that the view is better from those angles.

Trubb: I believe you'd be helping your teams a whole lot more by managing them rather than trying to manage the umpires.

[AugieDonatelli]

Trubb: I believe you'd be helping your teams a whole lot more by managing them rather than trying to manage the umpires.
As my signature, courtesy of the late, great Bill Klem, so aptly points out.

[loulou]

well said augie.hey coach,tell your kids to swing the bat

[trubblmaiker]

YUsually, those high pitches are mistakes anyway, and end up in the bleachers as home runs.

The reason they are mistakes is because it is a pitch that can be hit hard, as you so eloquently observe..noting that they end up in the bleachers....So, based upon that pure logic, how can the same pitch be considered a ball if the batter does not swing at it?

Now, I understand I'm an easy target and it's fun to team up and jump on the coach. I'm not here to criticize umps. I'm here to hone my craft because I love the game....(as we all supposedly do). I offer a different perspective, but just because it's different does not mean it isn't valid.

I never claim to have a better view of the pitch or play from the dugout or coach box. I never argue judgement calls on the field. I treat umps with dignity and respect, as well as the players and parents/fans. Most of the time umpires treat me the same. There are a lot of facets of umpiring games that I admire about you guys. I've read a lot of wisdom on these boards and can respect the experience it took to become that wise on the rules of this game. Many of you have pet peeves that you take out on coaches and that is human...well I have one with umps...Tight strike zones ruin the game. I teach my kids to swing the bat and we are aggressive at the plate. When an ump has an extremely tight strike zone most of the time, the other team goes up to bat with the bat on the shoulder trying to work a walk, or make the pitcher get deep in counts and make him throw a lot of pitches. I'm not asking for much, but if every ump called the strike zone by the rule book the games would have more action and move more quickly with less walks and pitching changes.

So, here's the question....If you are going to enforce the letter of the law of the rule book on relatively rare situations like balks, and interference/obstruction and others, then why not the most common opportunity to enforce the rule book like the strike zone?

It's a valid question and deserves a better answer than some kind of mob mentality to 'let's all jump on the coach and chastise him for daring to try and manage umps instead of his team' sort of response.

Which of you dares to answer the question based on logic and merit?

[BrianC14]

So, here's the question....If you are going to enforce the letter of the law of the rule book on relatively rare situations like balks, and interference/obstruction and others, then why not the most common opportunity to enforce the rule book like the strike zone?

It's a valid question and deserves a better answer than some kind of mob mentality to 'let's all jump on the coach and chastise him for daring to try and manage umps instead of his team' sort of response.

Which of you dares to answer the question based on logic and merit?

Every one of those things in your post (that I've put in boldface type are judgement calls.

Do you know the difference between a judgement call and the application of the rules?

As I said before, you might want to consider putting more effort into the things you can control vs. the things you cannot.

THAT is a valid response which you appear to have rejected out of hand.

You're not the victim here, so quit acting like one.

[Richard_Siegel]

....So, here's the question....If you are going to enforce the letter of the law of the rule book on relatively rare situations like balks, and interference/obstruction and others, then why not the most common opportunity to enforce the rule book like the strike zone?.....

It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness....

The visualization of the strike zone is interpreted the same by each umpire according to the rule book but what each umpires sees in reality is often slightly different. It is called judgment and these differences will never change. You will always have these slight differences from one umpire to the next.

Just as a basketball ref might see an action by a player as a foul but his partner might not. Or a football official might see an action by a player as holding but another official might not. Until we are all replaced by the Questec machine, there will always be disagreement over the strike zone from umpire to player to coach. There is no use complaining about it. Understand it and work with it. Study the umpire's "zone" early and use it to your advantage.

[trubblmaiker]

Mr. Siegel, I appreciate your wisdom in your response and the respect and dignity you display in your post. To Brian, Augie, Bob,Ken, and Lou...I say this...the egotistical approach is what separates me from respecting any ump that feels like he is above the game. I do not tolerate the prima donna attitude in my players and I feel like NO ONE is above the game. The game has respect and durability to outlast us all. I am a baseball purist. I take exception to any person that feels they must leave their mark on the game by putting themselves above it. Let's cut through the chase here....interpretation/judgement aside, many things about the rules are cut and dried, the strike zone is one of them. A pitch above the navel in the heart of the plate is clearly a strike within the rules....the problem I have is with umps that feel like they must establish themselves by calling pitches like they see on tv, or establishing their own 'zone' is crap. It's a strike or it ain't. I understand the game as it is and adapt to it, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it. I thought I was lighting a single candle in the darkness rather than cursing it by raising awareness of the travesty of umpires all across the country trying to establish their own worth/importance by proving they are a good ump because they have their 'own' strike zone. A 12 yo strike zone must be a good bit larger than a HS strike zone, but I still see HS umps calling youth games bringing their "own" zone to 12 yo games. What a disgrace to see the coaches take advantage and have their kids constantly take borderline pitches and everyone witness a 'walk-fest' because the ump feels his integrity and his egotistical worth is on the line as a HS ump calling a youth league game. He doesn't hesitate to call a flinch from the set a balk on an 11 yo pitcher but refuses to give him anything above the navel as a called strike. This type of attitude among the cop like swaggering umps that feel like they have to prove their worth by being a hard-ass at all levels is what has turned me against some basic baseball purisms...one of which I am in favor of taking advantage of some of the present technology that is in use in tennis, hockey, and other sports and using the laser strike zone to call pitches balls or strikes consistently. I watch a game on tv and they replay the close pitches tracking the pitch and comparing it to the rule book strike rectangle against the ump's call, and more often than not the ump gets it right. But at the youth levels you find these umps that feel like they must establish their control by calling pitches in the dirt as strikes and pitches above the belt ball and it is sickening to witness. Get over yourself Augie and call the dam pitch by the book and quit worrying that you might get a foul tip to the mask every now and then.

Call strikes, strikes make outs, outs make innings, innings make games, games make money, money buys beer....CALL STRIKES!

[carolinablue]

Trubblmaiker,

For every coach like you that wants the higher strike there is 15 that will raise he!! if you call it. Should we give into you because you are raising he!! on an umpire board instead of the field.

Most good umpires have a workable, respectible zone and are consistant with it. If they don't they won't be around long enough to be considered good. They may vary a little on the boarder but the pitches that should be called strikes they won't miss. The rest is up to the pitcher, catcher and coach. That is one reason why someone always wins and someone always loses. Who can adjust and make the quality pitches.

[dash_riprock]

many things about the rules are cut and dried, the strike zone is one of them... call the damn pitch by the book...CALL STRIKES!
If you want strikes (and I believe all of us do), the last thing you need is a rulebook strike zone.

[KenGibes]

To Brian, Augie, Bob,Ken, and Lou...I say this...the egotistical approach is what separates me from respecting any ump that feels like he is above the game. I do not tolerate the prima donna attitude in my players and I feel like NO ONE is above the game. The game has respect and durability to outlast us all. I am a baseball purist. I take exception to any person that feels they must leave their mark on the game by putting themselves above it. Let's cut through the chase here....


Yes... let's cut to the chase.

When I coached youth baseball (looooong before I umpired), I started every season with asking my team the question, "What is the strike zone?"

After listening to the players' various interpretations of what they thought the strike zone was, I provided my answer: "The strike zone is where the umpire is calling strikes today."

To teach otherwise is to make losers out of your ball players. The umpire's strike zone is what it is. You can fight it, complain about it, get ejected over it.. all in futility. Or, you can recognize it and adjust to it. (Hint: The team that adjusts the best to the umpire's strike zone has a marked advantage.)

Since you don't already know it, I'll key you in on something... Umpires have to use judgment to apply the strike zone. Every ball/strike call is a judgment call based on an umpires interpretation of the strike zone as it's described in the rule book.

Umpires don't try to "make their mark" by inventing newfangled strike zones to call. Actually, umpires would prefer to draw as little attention as possible to themselves during a baseball game.

Finally, I don't care if you respect me or not. In fact, after reading your dribble for the last few days, I prefer that you NOT respect me. I don't think I want to be on your short list of "good umpires who call the game the way I think they should."

And drop the "purist" crap... your inane remarks belie your phony facade.

[Dragon29]

trubblemaiker,

We all love strikes; we call as many as we can.

I do a lot of youth ball, (11-14) so I do call those high strikes (though not quite as high for the 13-14s) and I'm willing to bet that most of the guys on this board (or not!) who work the lower levels also call them; but if I go to a HS JV or Varsity game and start calling those, I'll be laughed out of the park. It's the concept of calling the 'strike zone of least resistance.'

I think one of the things you're not taking into consideration is the changeability of the strike zone itself; only the inside & outside are 'set'; the top and bottom change w/every hitter. So, even a perfectly called (by anyone's definition) and consistent strike zone changes dozens of times per game. Add to that the fact that most coaches (maybe not you! but most of them) don't watch the pitch all the way through the zone the way we're trained to - they 'give up' on the pitch as it approaches the zone, turn their attention to the hitter and then see where F2 catches it, so they're not actually seeing the same pitch we are. There's a reason we stand where we stand.

[AugieDonatelli]

Get over yourself Augie and call the dam pitch by the book and quit worrying that you might get a foul tip to the mask every now and then.
A foul tip is caught by the catcher. Did you mean foul ball?

Let me tell you what a totally stupid comment you just made here. I have taken 9 shots to the collar bone, back before plated chest protectors were even invented yet! You take your ass back behind the plate and take the kind of shots we take from 85 to 95 MPH fastballs. I've had my elbow nearly shattered, shots to the stomach and the inner thigh--black and blue for weeks at a time, cup shots that will down any man, shots off the hands and forearms on a regular basis, not to mention concussive shots to the mask that knock the mask off the face. On top of that, I've had a couple of catchers miss balls on purpose trying to get me hurt because they didn't like a call. Not to mention all the catchers that don't live up to their name and can't even get a glove on the ball, like when my elbow was severely injured. That's what umpires endure. Wanna get back there and give it a go?

I call pitches above the belt strikes, I just don't call them at the armpits. Of course, if you were better at reading and comprehending than you are at mouthing off, you wouldn't sound quite as ridiculous. I call pitches using the book as a wonderful guideline and starting point, and adjust it to the level of baseball being played, as we are instructed to do. You don't have a MLB tight zone for LL baseball, and you don't call nose to toes in high school ball. It's as simple as that.

[ExCop]

It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness....


Richard, this is such a good line I'm giving serious consideration to replacing my "I'm not discussing it" mantra:

Manager: "How can you call that? Where was the ball? Huh? Tell me - where was it!"

Me: "It is better to light one candle than..."

Oh yeah. The look on their face will be sooooo worth it. Goin to cross my eyes too.....

[mudder]

Because it's NOT our game.

In a nutshell the 'customers" determine how they want the strike zone to be called.

Pete Booth

Thats fine, but just change the book definition of the strike zone to what the "customers want", so to speak. At least we'd all have the same starting point. Then 20 years from now change the zone to whatever is accepted as a strike at that time.

I know I'm talking nonsense now, but I've just gotten back into umpiring this year after being away from it for a long time, and I guess you veterans have adjusted over the years, but I'm finding it very difficult to adjust and not call the "just below letter high" strike, that was routinely called when I began umpiring, so I can certainly relate to some of what troublemaker is saying.

Everyone agrees that the zone should be stretched for age appropriateness, but I gotta tell ya, when I'm BU doing 14-17 year old games, and I'm in P3/P4 (sorry, I think thats B/C position for my American brethren) I just skake my head when I routinely see a just below letter high pitch right down the middle of the plate, called a ball by my partner , and I just think to myself that those who were involved in the first 100 years of baseball would be rolling in their graves to see these pitches not called strikes, that were called strikes for so long.

But I guess the game has evolved, and I guess I have to adapt if I want to keep umpiring.

[AugieDonatelli]

I just skake my head when I routinely see a just below letter high pitch right down the middle of the plate, called a ball by my partner , and I just think to myself that those who were involved in the first 100 years of baseball would be rolling in their graves to see these pitches not called strikes, that were called strikes for so long.

But I guess the game has evolved, and I guess I have to adapt if I want to keep umpiring.

You really actually shook your head every time they called this pitch a ball? So, did anyone see you shaking your head? Did you know that you were actually throwing your partner under the bus by outwardly disagreeing with him. People aren't stupid, they are watching the umpires and they pick up on things like this.

The strike zone was very different 100 years ago. Until 1969, the strike zone was the top of the shoulders to the bottom of the knees. In 1969 they changed it to armpits to top of the knees. Unless you're like 80 years old, you weren't using this zone when you umpired. Umpires gradually began lowering the top of the zone to the belt ever since. In an attempt to thwart this movement, baseball again changed the zone. In 1988, the top was changed to the midpont between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pant. In 1995, the bottom of the zone was changed from the top of the knees to the hollow beneath the knee cap.

So, you can see how everyone has a different interpretation of the strike zone, because it can't even be scientifically set in stone. With the modern Questec machines, they are trying to make it more uniform, but in real life (which means your games and my games) there is no such technology. We just have to call the pitches the best we know how. The book is a great place to start for a general guideline.

[Richard_Siegel]

... I just shake my head when I routinely see a just below letter high pitch right down the middle of the plate, called a ball by my partner .....

So you stand in the infield and show disagreement with your partner's pitch call? Do you think that is a good idea? Do you throw your partner under the bus often?

[BrianC14]

So you stand in the infield and show disagreement with your partner's pitch call? Do you think that is a good idea? Do you throw your partner under the bus often?

Come on, guys, even I could see that he meant that figuratively. :|

As for the "below the letters" strike.... let's see, the book definition is

The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a
horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the kneecap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter’s stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.

Now I don't know what uniforms are being worn by the teams you guys call for, but in my neck of the woods, the lettering on a baseball jersey typically bottom out just at or below the sternum on most players. If a pitch grazes the bottom of those letters, I'm callin' it. That pitch easily fits the description of the midpoint of the shoulders and the top of the pants. Anything lower than that and you may as well set the top of your zone at the top of the belt and forget about "midpoint..." business.

[mudder]

So you stand in the infield and show disagreement with your partner's pitch call? Do you think that is a good idea? Do you throw your partner under the bus often?

Come on guys don't be so literal, of course I don't physically shake my head, poor choice of words. Some things just don't translate properly in print!, and I'm not disaggring with my partner per say for calling those balls, I'm just coming to grips with reality and how the game has changed.

Augie, I'm aware of all changes to the zone and when they were made but I umped as a kid in the late 80's/early 90's, and as I say letter high fast balls were strikes by me and most of the other umpires I worked with as I recall. But you must admit, the book zone height has dropped by 8-10" since the beginning of baseball (if I measure and the anatomy correctly - from top of shoulder's down to mid point ....) but the top of reality s.zone has dropped maybe 20" since the beginning of baseball (top shoulders to belt), thats all I'm saying.

[AugieDonatelli]

Come on guys don't be so literal, of course I don't physically shake my head, poor choice of words. Some things just don't translate properly in print!, and I'm not disaggring with my partner per say for calling those balls, I'm just coming to grips with reality and how the game has changed.

Augie, I'm aware of all changes to the zone and when they were made but I umped as a kid in the late 80's/early 90's, and as I say letter high fast balls were strikes by me and most of the other umpires I worked with as I recall. But you must admit, the book zone height has dropped by 8-10" since the beginning of baseball (if I measure and the anatomy correctly - from top of shoulder's down to mid point ....) but the top of reality s.zone has dropped maybe 20" since the beginning of baseball (top shoulders to belt), thats all I'm saying.I started umpiring (baseball that is) in 1986, and nobody was calling the zone you describe around these parts, except maybe for Little League® Minors. Everywhere else, until 1988, was calling it much lower. After 1988, we were told to bring up the zone to the midpoint, to which everyone said, "yeah, uh-huh, sure." But eventually we all started the "one or two ball widths above the belt," which is in reality the midpoint, or "bottom of the letters," and I refuse to take it any higher than what the norm is.

[AugieDonatelli]

Come on, guys, even I could see that he meant that figuratively. :|

Oh crap, even you could tell???? Wow, I must be really dense!!!!








:p

[BrianC14]

Oh crap, even you could tell???? Wow, I must be really dense!!!!








:p

Hey, don't you dare come down to my level, Mister, or I'll ... I'll....

I'll hurt your feelings! :p

[BrianC14]

I started umpiring (baseball that is) in 1986, and nobody was calling the zone you describe around these parts, except maybe for Little League® Minors. Everywhere else, until 1988, was calling it much lower. After 1988, we were told to bring up the zone to the midpoint, to which everyone said, "yeah, uh-huh, sure." But eventually we all started the "one or two ball widths above the belt," which is in reality the midpoint, or "bottom of the letters," and I refuse to take it any higher than what the norm is.

No argument from me on that one. ;)

I always get to chuckling when F2 sticks a pitch knee-high, middle of the dish pitch on a batter who' 6'4" tall.... 'STRIKE!'

Next batter is 5'2", and F2 sticks the ball again... ... "Ball!" Then I can hear DC claim... "That was the same spot!"

So I quietly "ask" the catcher, "Is it me or are there a new set of knees at bat here?" ;)

If I hear the DC any more after that, I don't get angry.

I get eject-y. :|

[carolinablue]

Mudder,

If you think a certain pitch at a certain height is a strike, then you should call it when your behind the dish. If your too high I think you will eventually have to adjust a little due to the resistance. That's how we learn . If you think it's a strike, call it a strike. It could be you find that you can get away with it.

[trubblmaiker]

The reason coaches complain if an ump calls a pitch above the belt a strike is because in their effort to adapt to the current interpretation of the strike zone, they have instructed their players to lay off that pitch. It is easier to complain to what he has already taught rather than teach to make adjustments mid game.

One rather unique point of strike zone history that has yet to be mentioned is the curious fact that the batter could instruct the pitcher to throw a low one or a high one in the early days. It has come a long way since then for sure.

But my biggest complaint is the influence over the game's evolution by a small fraternity of guys that hold the power to effect such changes. If MLB umps are the cream of the umpiring crop, (which I'm sure they are), what we have is a small group of men too old and fat to play and protected by some mystical shroud of secrecy. We, the fans of the game can barely name a few of the veterans. Only the most serious of fans can identify the umps by name and where 'their' strike zone is. We don't know how much money they make, when they make mistakes we read where it is being reviewed by the association but we don't get the results of that review. We don't get interviews on certain close calls after the game. Players, managers, and owners and everybody else involved in the game live their lives under the microscope on and off the field. Every detail is publicized, but umps are protected and the discussions held between them and their superiors remain behind closed doors. And they are the ones that have been instrumental in evolving the strike zone over the years...like it has been some sort of conspiracy. When I hear or read comments like, " I refuse to call it any higher than one ball above the belt", I (figuratively) shake my head in wonderment. To refrain an earlier comparison, if somebody hires you to paint their house purple and yellow polka dots are you going to paint it white and say that you refuse to comply with their rules because you thought you knew what was best? It's arrogance and power greed to willfully refuse to comply with what the rule book says. The irony is this, the letter high fastball is usually hit with power while the knee high pitch is usually a grounder.

Today's modern strike zone takes out the high heater as an out pitch. No batter will offer at a pitch above the belt. If letter high strikes were called routinely, we could go back to the business of using the neck-high fastball as an out pitch with 2 strikes once again...boy, I miss those days.

[carolinablue]

It's true the letter high fastball is subject to get hammered but it is also a tougher pitch to hit and if the ball has anything besides the cover on it, it will get a lot of swinging strikes as well. It's kind of a high risk, high reward pitch for both the batter and pitcher.

However, I see a lot of pitchers climb the ladder on batters to get strike-outs and it still works. I see it in games I work and also in the pros on TV.

[BrianC14]

You know Mr. Trubb, perhaps you should seriously consider taking Augie's advice from a previous post of his.

Go take the classes.
Go to the clinic (at least one).
Learn how to work the slot.
Learn how to work the bases, too.
Then strap on the gear and work some games.
Then come back and tell us just how easy it is.

Until then, I can only conclude that you're an aggrieved coach with an axe to grind.

[AugieDonatelli]

Hey Troubled, nobody said that they refused to call anything higher than one ball above the belt. There goes that reading and comprhension problem again.

I said that I call two balls or so above the belt, which is exactly the midpoint, or bottom of the letters on typical uniforms. Through the years, I have been praised by coaches, catchers, pitchers and fellow umpires as having one damn good strike zone. That is why I have consistently been a very highly rated umpire (always in the top 20 out of 100+ in the association, based on playoff assignments) all these years.

[trubblmaiker]

If 2 balls above the belt is midpoint, then his armpits are in his pockets.

I have actually done some local umpiring to get a taste of what you guys go through...enough to admire a man that knows the rules, controls the game, keeps it moving, calls it fairly for both sides, and goes the whole game rather unnoticed. Despite what you may think from what I might say, I respect the men in blue and get along with them famously during our games. Maybe I do have an axe to grind, but only one and it's the low strike zone....and maybe arrogant cop types that swagger behind the mask full of self importance...but admittedly, the strike zone is a much more prevalent problem than those types...they don't last long enough to be a real problem. I'm just one guy with an opinion. Just because I didn't run for the oval office doesn't mean I can't criticize the president....and besides, I have read many examples on these boards where you guys were real quick to give a coach advice on how best to manage his team, so...I'm just saying....A judge's job is to interpret and uphold the law and an umpire's job is to know and apply the rules as they are written. When a high strike is called a ball the guy calling it knows it's a rule book strike but calls it a ball anyway. Please don't use interpretation as the gray area behind your reason. If a judge presiding over your trial continued to admit evidence against you that was illegaly obtained you would cry foul as loudly as the next guy....(baseball pun intended).

[BrianC14]

If 2 balls above the belt is midpoint, then his armpits are in his pockets.

I have actually done some local umpiring to get a taste of what you guys go through...enough to admire a man that knows the rules, controls the game, keeps it moving, calls it fairly for both sides, and goes the whole game rather unnoticed. Despite what you may think from what I might say, I respect the men in blue and get along with them famously during our games. Maybe I do have an axe to grind, but only one and it's the low strike zone....and maybe arrogant cop types that swagger behind the mask full of self importance...but admittedly, the strike zone is a much more prevalent problem than those types...they don't last long enough to be a real problem. I'm just one guy with an opinion. Just because I didn't run for the oval office doesn't mean I can't criticize the president....and besides, I have read many examples on these boards where you guys were real quick to give a coach advice on how best to manage his team, so...I'm just saying....A judge's job is to interpret and uphold the law and an umpire's job is to know and apply the rules as they are written. When a high strike is called a ball the guy calling it knows it's a rule book strike but calls it a ball anyway. Please don't use interpretation as the gray area behind your reason. If a judge presiding over your trial continued to admit evidence against you that was illegaly obtained you would cry foul as loudly as the next guy....(baseball pun intended).

Well maybe you need to go whine to your local umpire association at their next meeting?
Tell me, what level of baseball do you coach? (apologize if you've already stated that and I missed it).
As far as your commentary about judges is concerned, judges INTERPRET the law in every decision they make. Ask 10 judges to provide their opinion of a particular law, and you're likely to end up with 12 opinions. Like it or not, that's what they do.

[AugieDonatelli]

As I said, very highly rated. My zone rocks. Deal with it.

[BrianC14]

As I said, very highly rated. My zone rocks. Deal with it.

I think it's interesting to look back on games I've worked....

without a doubt, hitters will almost always get more agitated over a high pitch I call for a strike than the low ones that I might go down and get.

During the past season, I had several games where I had to consciously work to make sure I didn't go TOO HIGH in the zone.

[zam989s]

My zone got progressively better over the course of my first full season of higher level baseball this year. It not only got more consistent, but it got a little bigger. I heard some feedback during the spring from fellow umpires and some coaches that I know well that my zone was consistent, but a bit too tight. After working a bunch of games this summer, I loosened it up and I think that helped a lot. Most high school/Legion coaches around here would much rather the zone be a bit bigger as long as it is consistent.

To me, getting the pitch at the hollow of the knee for a strike is easier than consistently calling the high strike. I made an effort to call the high strike this season, but it seems like one night I would be able to get that pitch at the belly button for a strike, then later in the week I wouldn't go above the belt for some reason. I'm really going to focus on that at the beginning of next season.

[carolinablue]

I know this is a little off subject but the post above brought it to mind.

every once in a while I will get a fast ball right down the pipe but at the very top of the zone and it will freeze me. I will finally make a delayed call but feel a little stupid afterwards. It hasn't happened much and none of late. Has this ever happened to anybody else here.

[trubblmaiker]

As I said, very highly rated. My zone rocks. Deal with it.

Hey, you got your rating on your side...I got the rule book on mine.

Brian, I have coached for 12 years at all levels up to 16-18 yo summer travel and legion teams. I currently coach my #3 son's 12 and under travel team. Which is why I am on this current kick about the zone. It didn't bother me much when I was coaching the middle and high school kids on their summer/legion teams, expected it low actually...but, when I dropped back to the younger age group last year with this team, I became real frustrated watching some of these youth umps become real animated in their mechanics, HS tight zones, and picky balks on some things and not even a warning on other things. It's not just confined to a local area, we play tournaments all over.

Just like kids emulate the players on tv, umps watch MLB games and learn from the best. They are the ones I got the real beef with, because over the years their little 'secret society' has been instrumental in changing this great game at its core. I grew up admiring guys like Bruce Froemming, Harry Wendelstedt, and others, but would like to choke Bob Davidson on his need to call a balk at least once a game, and when Eric Gregg was behind the plate Maddux was getting a win for sure. It got so ridiculous that the umps in charge felt the need to start calling the higher strike more in line with the rule book....it even got leaked to the press where the fans heard about it. It's gotten better but hasn't fully trickled down to the youth games yet, where umps feel like they must have a personal strike zone to be any good.

I would be just as upset if preachers started teaching on Sunday's that give your money and you will go to heaven....forget the Bible, it's just a guideline. In fact, the last time that happened Martin Luther lit a single candle in the darkness and nailed a notice to the front door to begin his reformation of the Catholic church.

[Richard_Siegel]

I know this is a little off subject but the post above brought it to mind.

every once in a while I will get a fast ball right down the pipe but at the very top of the zone and it will freeze me. I will finally make a delayed call but feel a little stupid afterwards. It hasn't happened much and none of late. Has this ever happened to anybody else here.

The problem might be that your timing is too fast on "normal" strikes, the ones right down the middle. When the marginal strike comes you have to think about it for a moment before you call it and then you perceive the call as delayed. I suggest you think about all your calls that same way. If you do that then you will have the same timing or the same "delay" on all your pitches. Then you will appear more consistent and you will become more comfortable on ALL of your calls.

[HugoTafurst]

(snip)
when Eric Gregg was behind the plate Maddux was getting a win for sure.
(Snip)
.

Don't tell that to the Marlins ('97);)

[BrianC14]

Hey, you got your rating on your side...I got the rule book on mine.

Brian, I have coached for 12 years at all levels up to 16-18 yo summer travel and legion teams. I currently coach my #3 son's 12 and under travel team. Which is why I am on this current kick about the zone. It didn't bother me much when I was coaching the middle and high school kids on their summer/legion teams, expected it low actually...but, when I dropped back to the younger age group last year with this team, I became real frustrated watching some of these youth umps become real animated in their mechanics, HS tight zones, and picky balks on some things and not even a warning on other things. It's not just confined to a local area, we play tournaments all over.

Just like kids emulate the players on tv, umps watch MLB games and learn from the best. They are the ones I got the real beef with, because over the years their little 'secret society' has been instrumental in changing this great game at its core. I grew up admiring guys like Bruce Froemming, Harry Wendelstedt, and others, but would like to choke Bob Davidson on his need to call a balk at least once a game, and when Eric Gregg was behind the plate Maddux was getting a win for sure. It got so ridiculous that the umps in charge felt the need to start calling the higher strike more in line with the rule book....it even got leaked to the press where the fans heard about it. It's gotten better but hasn't fully trickled down to the youth games yet, where umps feel like they must have a personal strike zone to be any good.

I would be just as upset if preachers started teaching on Sunday's that give your money and you will go to heaven....forget the Bible, it's just a guideline. In fact, the last time that happened Martin Luther lit a single candle in the darkness and nailed a notice to the front door to begin his reformation of the Catholic church.


OK, Trubb, I think I see your problem. You're clearly trying to compare MLB with youth level, and that's a mighty big mistake. They are incomparable, in every facet of the game, umpires included.

I don't know about other guys, but when I watch an MLB game, I try NOT to emulate things they're doing, for several reasons, but not the least of which is the fact that they have had YEARS more experience calling games at the professional level, and as I said, comparing that level to youth level or even high school is a fool's errand.

[BrianC14]

The problem might be that your timing is too fast on "normal" strikes, the ones right down the middle. When the marginal strike comes you have to think about it for a moment before you call it and then you perceive the call as delayed. I suggest you think about all your calls that same way. If you do that then you will have the same timing or the same "delay" on all your pitches. Then you will appear more consistent and you will become more comfortable on ALL of your calls.

That's great advice.

[trubblmaiker]

OK, Trubb, I think I see your problem. You're clearly trying to compare MLB with youth level, and that's a mighty big mistake. They are incomparable, in every facet of the game, umpires included.

I don't know about other guys, but when I watch an MLB game, I try NOT to emulate things they're doing, for several reasons, but not the least of which is the fact that they have had YEARS more experience calling games at the professional level, and as I said, comparing that level to youth level or even high school is a fool's errand.


No Brian, that is not my problem....not entirely anyways, my problem is with umps at all levels that feel like they must compare themselves to MLB umps and call the low strike zone and nothing above the belt. I just figured that since MLB umps call it that way that was the reason youth umps do.

[bobjenkins]

I just figured that since MLB umps call it that way that was the reason youth umps do.

My guess is that it's because the umpires get more grief from calling the zone you want than from calling the zone they do call -- and they (correctly) choose the path of least resistance.

I teach the umpires that if "every" coach / player / partner complains that the zone is too high / low / tight / big etc., then it probably is for that league / that level.

IOW, you need to take your complaint to the other coaches in that league and get them to agree to a change and to not comment when the "new" zone is called and to comment when the "old" zone is called.

[scumpire]

Depending on the level a plate umpire will see about 200-300 pitches per game. A lot of umpires work 2 games a night and maybe 3 or 4 on Saturday and Sunday. Depending on how much a guy works this can add up to maybe hundreds of games a year. I know guys that claim to work 500 games a year, although this is probably exaggerated. Regardless, the umpire (that is trying to do a good job) is going to have a much better idea of the strike zone than any one else that is on the field just based upon the experience. So keep that in mind when you are yelling at an umpire about his zone.

Now keep in mind that when you go down and coach the lower levels the umpires are probably just high school kids trying to make extra money for the summer or the old retired guy that just loves to be around baseball. Some of them might not really care all that much about improving but are at least trying to do their best. They may not have had any training either. A lot of little leagues will just have a meeting with a rules test and then you are off to work. So a lot of young umpires have to learn how to umpire by watching TV, or sometimes worse, watching other little league umpires.

Once an umpire starts to get experience he will probably move on and not return to the sand lot. So the cycle is endless. Little league fields have players, coaches, and umpires that are all out there trying to learn and get better at their respected job. As quoted by many big league umpires, the difference is everyone expects the umpires to be perfect from day one and get better from there. So you just have to be patient with the umpires at the little league level and understand the situation. I wouldn’t worry about what the umpires are doing so much and just focus on teaching the kids fundamentals. If a team can hit, catch, and throw like their supposed to, then most of the time you won’t give an umpire the opportunity to screw something up.

As someone mentioned earlier if it is such an issue, maybe try to get some more coaches to rally for your cause. If you are the only one who seems to have a problem with it then maybe it’s not such a big deal. If other coaches seem to agree then it maybe something that needs to be addressed. Suggest something to the umpire in chief at the next league meeting. Maybe ask him to provide more training somehow. Like instead of once at the beginning of the season have some training days thrown in throughout the season.

Also, the days of big league umpires like Eric Gregg with their unique strike zones are quickly fading if not already gone. Since every game is now on TV, every pitch is shown on “K-Zone,” and Ques Tec scores are held in such high regard, umpires have been forced to become more uniform with the strike zone.

[trubblmaiker]

All of you have given some excellent insight and I appreciate your candor and snarly humor. I've said my piece and I can only hope for an expedient trickle down effect of recent improvements at the MLB level. It's obvious the guys that frequent this site take pride in their craft and are constantly honing their skills....I can appreciate that and would probably never have a problem in a game with any one of you guys here. It's just that there are so many out there that don't go the extra step to make adjustments in their game. The tournaments we play are HS umps in training basically and I wish for the days when we had college kids and rec league umps, at least they would adjust to both coaches complaints. The guys we get are mostly good at what they do but there is a prevailing opinion that the rule book strike zone is too high and no one calls it to the midpoint and a few call nothing above the belt...which is frustrating to watch.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is if the boundary of a strike zone is touched by even a stitch on the ball then it is a strike...so effectively, one whole ball below the hollow of the knee and one whole ball off either edge is a rule book strike. If an ump wants to let it out a little bit he might call 2 balls off the edges and 2 balls off the bottom....(since they might be younger kids). At the top of the zone if the boundary is somewhere around the bottom of the letters a pitch could be a ball above that line and still be a rule book strike, but alas, most umps consider that about 3 balls too high. So if the highest strike called is 2 balls above the belt then the top boundary is really one ball above the belt...3 inches above the belt is the top of the strike zone boundary for most (good) umpires. That is the thing that I think needs changing. I may not get it changed in here, but at least I lit the candle rather than cursed the darkness.

Thanks for the conversation guys....I think I might be done with this topic.

[carolinablue]

The problem might be that your timing is too fast on "normal" strikes, the ones right down the middle. When the marginal strike comes you have to think about it for a moment before you call it and then you perceive the call as delayed. I suggest you think about all your calls that same way. If you do that then you will have the same timing or the same "delay" on all your pitches. Then you will appear more consistent and you will become more comfortable on ALL of your calls.

You may be right. I have been working hard on my timing this season and have had some improvement. I still however catch myself mentally calling pitches before they are in the mitt on occasion. Usually it will be an obvious strike and I will have to tell myself to slow down. Thanks for the input.

[scumpire]

You’re right about the fact that all it takes for a strike to be a strike is for any part of the ball to touch any part of the zone. The umpire would get killed if he enforced this literally though. An example would be the pitch that crosses the front edge of the plate right at the hollow of the knee but then bounces. This happens at the big league level too since Ques Tec scores are adjusted to throw out these types of pitches.

[cajunyankee]

Jumping in late here but I've got an opinion on this.
I've learned over the past seasons that I get much more grief at the level of ball I call (U-trip 12 and under) by having too tight a zone both up and down.

I've come to the conclusion that more strikes (up, down, in, or out) is better than not enough. They make the games go faster and keep the bitching to a minimum.

At this relatively low level of ball, my perspective is: call them, they'll swing.

[trubblmaiker]

good post cajunyankee....that was the whole point of my argument. Too many umps at the 12u level feel like they must call a MLB strike zone to be considered good. I agree with you, letters to knees, two balls out, and one ball in and make 'em swing. When they get to high school they have plenty of time to adjust, but at this age group where this often a time limit, nobody came to see a bunch of walks and taking pitches and an umpire with a shoebox tight strike zone....kudos to ya.

[shortyump_44]

I'm a female umpire for LL - usually Juniors/Seniors levels. (Did majors and below for several years) But, I'm also very little - 4'11" 105 lbs. When I get set, my eye level always ends up right at the top of the zone of the batters and also my height keeps me from calling the "ankle bitters". However, as said previously, half of the people are going to disagree with your call. But because I'm the only female umpire in our area, a lot of coaches seem to think they can try to "bully" to get their way. I tell them that the zone is not going to be discussed. It mostly happens at the local league level. During County, District and State - I earn a lot of respect and no questions or comments on my zone (only that they can't see me)!! Any ideas on how I can get these "guys" at our local levels to back off? In 4 1/2 years, I've only had one coach go home early as I do not believe in the game stopping scenes. Any input from our very experienced?

[nopachunts]

I work with a great umpire and the umpire happens to be a female. She is not as "vertically challenged" as you but she works High School, LL Jr and Sr during regular season and playoffs. She has worked District, State, Regional, and worked the 2007 Big League LL World Series. It took her a lot longer than a male umpire to attain the status she has.
You are working in traditionally man's world. Stick with it, be consistent, don't back down and you will earn the respect of the coaches, ADs, and players. If you are working LL now, as those players move into HS and farther your reputation will move with you.
The coaches at the lower levels of LL don't know which end of the bat to hit with sometimes, so take that into account during regular season. You said it yourself that once playoffs begin, the chatter usually stops.
Good luck and stick with it.

[cajunyankee]

Shorty,

I agree, stick with it, be consistent, firm, and respectful.

Never get rattled or upset outwardly. I like to call this outward demeanor "professional detatchment".

I am completely focused on the calls, the game, the rules, etc. and never let the emotions of those around me impact the way I conduct myself.

If you conduct yourself as the consumate professional, the fact that you're a female will fade in relevance.

[missouriump]

Shortyump,
I have never had the opportunity to work with a female umpire, yet. But, I agree with Nopachunts that if you stick with it, are consistent, professional, knowledgable, approachable and hustle then the good coaches will give you the deserved respect. He is also correct in the fact that as the level of play gets better the coaches are also better. Lower aged LL coaches generally don't know much and just show their ignorance via bluster towards the umps. Especially if they feel intimidated by an umpire who is female and most likely much shorter than them. Don't put up with too much bluster,though! If they deserve the hook, then give 'em da hook!

[cajunyankee]

If they deserve the hook, give em the hook.

That's gonna be my new tag line.

[shortyump_44]

Thanks for the info everyone. I love the hook line. My first year, I let it get to me, but have learned quite a bit and let it brush off my shoulders. Mostly it's the local league field that my son plays in. Other fields, everyone is great and during County, District and State tournements, always had great experiences with players and coaches alike. Mostly comments of great respect for a female and a short one at that to be out there (I say I get more protection from the catcher being short!!). But I'm taking your line - instead of sending them home, I'm giving them the hook!!!! Gotta love it!! I greatly appreciate the advice!!

[heyblue26]

good post cajunyankee....that was the whole point of my argument. Too many umps at the 12u level feel like they must call a MLB strike zone to be considered good. I agree with you, letters to knees, two balls out, and one ball in and make 'em swing. When they get to high school they have plenty of time to adjust, but at this age group where this often a time limit, nobody came to see a bunch of walks and taking pitches and an umpire with a shoebox tight strike zone....kudos to ya.

Yes let them swing away and have fun also.

[mazzamouth]

A lot of coaches will work off of how the catcher caught the pitch. If the catcher had to go higher than the shoulder or had to turn the mitt over to catch a pitch, most likely a ball. If the catcher had to go outside either knee or had to dive, most likely a ball. Dugouts can see north and south, but not east or west. Use to your advantage, YMMV.

I know i came in late here, but no higher than the shoulder.. that is a very tight Zone... most people go to the eyes...