That of course is not true. The Strike Zone is exactly the same in all rulebooks and at any level. If your a good and honest umpire,you call the book zone all the time or your cheating the kids and the game.
So... from the 2015 NHFS/FED rule book
"The strike zone is that space over home plate, the top of which is halfway between the batter's shoulders and the waistline, and the bottom being the knees, when he assumes his natural batting stance. The height of the strike zone is determined by the batter's normal batting stance. If he crouches or leans over to make the shoulder line lower, the umpire determines height by what would be the batter's normal stance."
From the MLB 2015 rule book:
"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."
So firstly I'll point out that they are different... The bottom for FED says knees while OBR is the hollow beneath the kneecap. *ANY* part of the 9 - 9 1/4 inch circumference of the ball passes *at any time* through that 3 dimensional zone is a strike. Secondly, in FED it's the the batter's "normal batting stance" while MLB is "stance as the batter is prepared to swing" - two somewhat different concepts as the judgement of normal batting stance is not the same as stance as prepared to swing. That's a very subjective viewpoint. Thirdly the difference between FED and OBR on the upper half of the zone is "waistline" vs. "top of uniform pants". Given how some players wear their uniforms these days that's a difference of a few inches sometimes ;-)... Finally, only in recent years has MLB been "urging" their umpires to call the upper half of the zone - that is above the waist.
Given that the *pros* (those making a lot more than me per game) have their own interpretation of the strike zone (and rule), that means your belief (from some an earlier post) is that they should hang up their equipment because they aren't calling it by the book, correct?
50% of umpiring is knowing the rules, applying the rules fairly, and maintaining your integrity. The other 50% of umpiring is game management.
Just because it's 14-0 in the first inning doesn't mean you change things especially when the other team hasn't even batted yet. However, if it's the 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th (whatever dictates the end in your level and ruleset) of a 25-0 game and you've been there well over 3 hours perhaps even approaching 4 hours - I cannot believe there is anyone who really wants to be there any more. Then you have to do something in order move the game along.
There are those that know the rules and understand game management and there are those that know the rules, apply only the rules, and could care less about game management. Being book smart and dictatorial doesn't necessarily make you a better umpire. And yes there are those that "make up" their own rules, only care about the game fee, and what to get it over with as soon as possible. You run into all types and have to make adjustments for each. So again, back the OP - yep it's perhaps wrong what happened in that game, but it's still in how you respond to the adversity that'll make you a better player, coach, umpire, parent, fan, etc. We're all "different" and all have different perspectives of calling it by the book especially since in 40 years that book has changed quite a lot and I find a lot of long time umpires that won't adjust to the newer rules, guidances, and interpretations. They just go by what they've known.
