Strike Zone

What is troubling about it? That's the way it is. The only place the strike zone is 17" wide is in the major leagues, and even then only at parks with questec.

Don't forget to add the diameter of the ball to the plate! My opinion were here to call strikes!!!! SWING THE BAT!!!

That all may be dash but there is no need to talk about the "attitude" at a clinic---this is why umpires get a name

We all know that umpires have adifferent zones but they need not broadcast it at a clinic

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
That all may be dash but there is no need to talk about the "attitude" at a clinic---this is why umpires get a name

We all know that umpires have adifferent zones but they need not broadcast it at a clinic

What attitude?

His attitude --telling people the coaches cannot see the inside pitch so I will keep calling all day

Coaches, the team in the dugout fans and anyone else in the stands cannot see inside or outside BUT they sure can see up and down...so he is correct!

The catcher can see what's going on and notifies the coach what today's strike zone is and they make their adjustments.

There are stands behind the plate, so the rest of us can see it as well.

You guys aren't keeping any secrets. We all know you each have your zone and we respect that, just keep it the same for both teams & be consistent, just don't start calling the batter's box lines as strikes and we won't have any issues.

Again I'll show my naivite, but why would an umpire brag about calling balls as strikes?

The plate is 17" wide the pitcher throws a ball that cuts the plate by half the diameter of the ball that means that the ball can pass over or through the strike zone making the zone 21' wide.and adds appx. 2' above and below the strike zone. I will call the zone by the rules AND i will strive to be consistant. Swing the bat!

quote:

Originally posted by JMoff:
We all know you each have your zone and we respect that, just keep it the same for both teams & be consistent, just don't start calling the batter's box lines as strikes and we won't have any issues.

Again I'll show my naivite, but why would an umpire brag about calling balls as strikes?

I agree 100% with your consistency comment. You have every right to expect that.

As far as the strike zone, I try to call what my assignor wants me to call. He is my boss.

The "rulebook" top of the zone is too high. A pitch at the midpoint between the top of the uniform pants and the top of the shoulders will usually result in cries of "leave it up" from the dugout. The bottom of the ribcage is the top of my zone.

The "rulebook" bottom of the zone is the only part that is just right. If the top of the ball nicks the hollow below the knee, the pitch is not low. It is also very hittable.

As far as in and out goes, about a baseball off the black is reasonable and hittable. Anything less and I'm getting dinged on my evals for not calling enough strikes.

The catcher can also influence calls (both ways). If he sets up inside and has to lunge outside to reach it, he's probably not getting the call (he's definitely not getting it if he doesn't catch the pitch). On the other hand, a catcher who sets up a bit off the plate (within reason), and sticks the pitch will probably get that one.

If you want to call me out for not calling strikes "by the book," you are not a keen observer of the game. Just watch the CWS some time.

As I said, I call what my assignor tells me to call. He's also one of very few men who have worked the national championship in all three divisions.

Agreed Dash, I was a Varsity Coach for 14 years (187-85). I realize where the strike zone is in the "BOOK"! I like to call,as I wanted as a coach, nothing above your hands and at the knees plus a "little" below, as far as in and out I am 2"on each side, that said I believe I am a pitchers umpire...SWING THE BAT!

Question:

Why define the strike zone in the "BOOK" and then use whatever you decide that day as "your" strike zone?--Umps are so adamamnt about what the "BOOK" says on so many things but with the strike zone it seems to be at their discretion and what the "assignor" dictates.

Very interesting

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
Question:

Why define the strike zone in the "BOOK" and then use whatever you decide that day as "your" strike zone?--Umps are so adamamnt about what the "BOOK" says on so many things but with the strike zone it seems to be at their discretion and what the "assignor" dictates.

Very interesting

TR - Do you believe the strike zone should be by the book, no exceptions, for all levels of play?

DASH

Why not ???

Why have it defined if you guys use what you decide for that day ?

C'mon now--you want rules by the book and then you want the strike zone to not be--the strike zone has now become an arbitrary thing--I could care less as long as it stays constant during the entire game but it rarely does. It makes it tough for players on each team to adjust.

By you guys making this statement it can cast doubt on all your decisions

So yes call it by the book, but you could care less as long as it's consistent.

Which is it?

dash

Again you are like the other umps in trying to explain--jibberish---as a coach we have no choice --we have to live with your strike zones even if we want it by the book--Yes I want it by the book but it will never happen, apparently

By the way I am still waiting for you to introduce yourself when we come to Baseball Heaven

quote:

Originally posted by POLOGREEN:
Don't forget to add the diameter of the ball to the plate! My opinion were here to call strikes!!!! SWING THE BAT!!!

Good point. And a very good lesson for any new umpire: you tend to be too tight when new. I GUARANTEE you, you will get less sqwauking with a loose strike zone than a tight one. Consistency is a given of course. 2 ball diameters outside, 1 inside. The coaches want the kids to swing (HS). Be easy on the high strikes though, especially in JUCO.

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
dash

Again you are like the other umps in trying to explain--jibberish---as a coach we have no choice --we have to live with your strike zones even if we want it by the book--Yes I want it by the book but it will never happen, apparently

By the way I am still waiting for you to introduce yourself when we come to Baseball Heaven

You are the only coach I have ever heard wanting a by the book zone. Every single high school and college coach I have ever dealt with wanted strikes. It is common for both coaches to ask for strikes at the pre-game meeting. No one - and I mean 100% - wants a tight zone. You are the anomaly my friend.

And the last time you told me you were going to be at baseball heaven I told you the times and fields where I would be working. I asked you to introduce yourself but you never did. You even said you "caught my act" at one of the games I mentioned. I will probably work that tournament again this year and I will keep you posted on my assignments. Don't you think it would be easier for you to figure out who I am rather than the opposite? You should be able to narrow it down to two people.

Not that difficult to find me--just come and ask my Head Coach or one of my Coaches where I am--I do not sit in the dugout

And you are evading the question--if other things are by the book why not the strike zone ?--not looking for a fight but just a simple answer if you have one

The book says anything that hits any part of the zone, well a ball in and a ball out is hitting the zone. It doesn't say how much, just some part. The bottom everyone agrees is the hollow of the knee. What is somewhat grey os the top. It says midway which I think most call. I call the bottom of the elbows, which with most batters is exactly right. If they have an unusual stance then you have to use something else.

I have been on both sides of this (Varsity Coach 1980-1994 in New Jersey) ALL I ever wanted was for the umpire to be consistant PERIOD. I always liked the umpire who would call low the strike zone, because thats where I taught my pitchers to pitch (keep the ball in the park).

The diameter of a baseball is a little over 2.9"....let's call it 3". The plate is 17" wide.

So, the distance from the outside of a ball touching the inside corner to the outside of a ball touching the outside corner is 23".

From the knee area...depending on code, to roughly the sternum...

The rule books provide for a fairly large zone and I call almost every inch of it. I've never met a coach who likes the full upper limit...not even a pitching coach. "Heck Jim, we don't want to encourage our pitchers to throw it up there."

To me it's pretty simple: call it the way the rule book states, period. If the level (age) of play is a factor, then the rule book should be adjusted specific to that level. Or, if umpires want to have the authority to determine their own stike zone, then the rule book should state such (hopefully with some parameters).

quote:

Originally posted by Celebrity Status:
To me it's pretty simple: call it the way the rule book states, period. If the level (age) of play is a factor, then the rule book should be adjusted specific to that level.

Nice thought. Here's reality, the youth leagues DO NOT adjust the strike zone, rather they leave that to common sense.

Back when I was an assigner, after hearing complaints from coaches and league officials about the expanded zone at the 9-10 age level, I sent a D-III umpire to work the plate at a game and instructed him to call the rule book zone.

After the first inning, in which 23 batters walked and which lasted over an hour, the opposing coaches begged him to "open it up and make them swing."

He said no and the game continued in the same fashion until the time limit was reached, somewhere in the second inning.

That night I received a call from the league president promising there would be no more complaints about not having the rule book strike zone.

Excellent MT!!!!


KIDS DON'T SWING THE BAT ENOUGH!!!

DASH, I question why the catcher catching the pitch has anything to do with it being a strike? Why would his inability to handle a pitch punish the pitcher and reward the batter???

quote:

Originally posted by #32 DAD:
DASH, I question why the catcher catching the pitch has anything to do with it being a strike? Why would his inability to handle a pitch punish the pitcher and reward the batter???

Because he made it look like a ball. And when that happens, a good catcher will say "my bad" to his pitcher, and he means it.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
What is troubling about it? That's the way it is. The only place the strike zone is 17" wide is in the major leagues, and even then only at parks with questec.

I understand the zone is wider than 17", what I had a problem with was his comment in regards to calling pitches strikes for alterior reasons. This gentleman was held in the highest regard by all in attendance, including many young people. To hear him say that he was calling pitches strikes which technically were not to teach a kid a lesson was not the right signal to send. It condoned the umpire persona that we are out there for ourselves more than for the players and the game. And no matter how consistently you call a strike that's 4" off of the plate, it's still not a good call.

quote:

To hear him say that he was calling pitches strikes which technically were not to teach a kid a lesson was not the right signal to send.

AGREE No way should he have said or done that. I want to play by the rules and have the kids and coaches do the same. I will "teach" by my example, the example of an umpire who looks AND acts Professional.

I think anyone who has ever watched a baseball game can appreciate the need for consistancy. My job this year is to chart pitches on this palm thingy. I do that for my son's varsity coach so he can extrapolate data on pitch location \ type \ result. Bottom line is, I'm calling every pitch along with the umpire via point and click.

In the first 5 games of the season, where there have been about 1200 pitches, I've disagreed with the umpire's call about 40 times (I clicked a square in or out of the zone when the pitch was called the other way). I would say half of these were breaking balls that were "up" and probably were, but I located them in the zone as they were ultimately caught down in the zone. I'd have called most of those pitches balls myself (having same bias towards the top part of the zone), so I've probably really disagreed with 20 of 1200 or about 1 1/2 percent of the pitches. Just to quantify my comments...

I need reading glasses to see, I'm being all I can be with this tool. Yet tonight, I heard our fans talking about how 'bad' the HU was. I think there were 5 pitches I disagreed with and 2 were those top of the zone breaking balls. In a 7 inning 12-8 game, those 3 disputed pitches didn't mean a lick, and that would assume a blind 43 year old from 100' away was better than HU. He was probably right and I was wrong...

My point is, I think you guys are doing a good job (at least in AZ). I tend to get in synch with the umpire very early with his zone and when he calls a pitch a strike that might not be, but is consistent, I tend to mark it in the zone and agree with him.

So we can all get generally happy with the umpire's strike zone. Yet, we still have a rule defined strike zone that we don't all buy into (especially on the top end). Why don't we change the rule? "The Letters" or "Arm Pits" or "Mid point between the arm pits and belt" or whatever definition the top of the strike zone has been, it isn't accepted by the baseball community (us).

Why can't we define a rule or guideline (3" or two ball diameters above the belt or something like that) which properly defines the zone called that can be measured and repeatable?

We've got 5 pages of the rule book allocated to batting out of order, yet we can't agree on the definition of a strike zone or what a 'swing' is (another sore subject with me).

quote:

Originally posted by Kumi:

I understand the zone is wider than 17", what I had a problem with was his comment in regards to calling pitches strikes for alterior reasons. This gentleman was held in the highest regard by all in attendance, including many young people. To hear him say that he was calling pitches strikes which technically were not to teach a kid a lesson was not the right signal to send. It condoned the umpire persona that we are out there for ourselves more than for the players and the game.

I'm with you here. It's called the "FU" call and I don't do it (as much as I'd like to sometimes). That would be tantamount to compromising my integrity.

quote:

And no matter how consistently you call a strike that's 4" off of the plate, it's still not a good call.

Did you watch the CWS? That pitch was a strike all day long, called by the best in the business. And if you looked at the scores, very few teams had problems scoring runs.

You want me to narrow the zone? Get rid of metal bats and I will consider it.

The strike zone that day will be established by the guy behind the plate that day. As long as he is consistent thats all I ask. The players will adjust to the established strike zone if they have a clue. And if its consistent I will never say a word. Shut up and hit.

I have seen umpires with a shoe box strike zone trying to show they are tight with it. Walks , followed by grooved pitches for bombs. And then later followed up with the same umpire opening the zone up because he is realizing he is spending way too long at the park today. And if he would have had a realistic strike zone to start with all of this could have been avoided.

As long as both pitchers are throwing to the same established strike zone. As long as all the hitters are hitting against the same established strike zone AND it stays consistent for both teams -------- Whats the problem?

Establish the strikezone and be consistent from pitch ONE all the way through to the competition of the game.
I hope to be that...I can't say I'm perfect BUT I will strive to be the best I can be!

quote:

Originally posted by Coach_May:
The strike zone that day will be established by the guy behind the plate that day. As long as he is consistent thats all I ask. The players will adjust to the established strike zone if they have a clue. And if its consistent I will never say a word. Shut up and hit.

I have seen umpires with a shoe box strike zone trying to show they are tight with it. Walks , followed by grooved pitches for bombs. And then later followed up with the same umpire opening the zone up because he is realizing he is spending way too long at the park today. And if he would have had a realistic strike zone to start with all of this could have been avoided.

As long as both pitchers are throwing to the same established strike zone. As long as all the hitters are hitting against the same established strike zone AND it stays consistent for both teams -------- Whats the problem?

Please clone yourself.

I kind of waited until this thread had worked its way out to offer my thoughts. Its basically the same as I have posted over the years, but it has worked for me...

My zone is just what happens when I am behind the plate attempting to judge a 3 dimensional strike zone that changes based on the batters height.

If you can imagine an invisible floating column, 17 and a half inches wide that extends from a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and at the lower level is the hollow beneath the knee cap. The zone is determined by from each batters stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball....the strike zone changes for a 5'6" batter to a 6' batter......

All of this adds to each umpire having slightly their own zone....even as we all try to adhere to the rule book definition.

It is just the reality of doing the job. I am known as an inside and low ball umpire. I know this from video tape of my cage work at umpire clinics. I am more apt to call a ball a strike inside and low than I am at the outside and high side of the zone. Its just my reality...maybe its because I am short that I see that lower ball as a strike. Dont know, not sure what I can do as a human to improve on that.

I try and keep as consistent a zone as possible to avoid problems, but it is what it is.

Given that, in games with umpires of my experience, you will get different zones...much of it based on such things as the umpires height, his stance and the quality of the catchers.....

I believe that most trained umpires call zone with the rule book in mind and to the best of their ability..... Going back on my training, I can tell you based on video proof, that I call the borderline pitch inside and low a strike, but the outside and up pitch a ball.....now that is defining "my zone" over the strict rule book zone....

Its a condition of my height, my stance, my experience and probably a hundred other factors.......I keep working to refine my zone, but truth be told, I probably wont ever get it book rule perfect.....

I hesitate to offer this statement since usually this is the childs way out, but I will offer that it isnt as easy as it seems.....But I will guarantee you that I will keep trying to get better.......

Despite all our efforts, I feel there will always be some variance.......but I will try to get better......if at any time I feel I am doing "good enough" and fail to work on refining my game......I will call it a career.......

One part of the equation that nobody has mentioned is the catcher. Does he sit high or in a super tight ball, does he move a lot or does he snatch pitches. All this influences our perception of the zone. If he sits high or likes to move inside, that means we have to move up and the bottom gets inconsistant. Snatching pitches screws up our tracking and results in more balls called, which is exactly the reverse of what the catcher is trying to do. Popping up early also takes our view away.
My point is not only does our size, our depth perception and mechanics contribute to our zone, how much or little we get to see of the zone is a big part.