Register or Sign In to remove these ads
beerguy55

Ump gets shown up by batter, batter doesn't like ump's response

67 posts in this topic

5 hours ago, Mister B said:

No, I'm saying the top of the strike zone can widely vary depending on the umpire and still be interpreted as correct. 

And I disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
On ‎1‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 7:03 PM, beerguy55 said:

This happened in a game I was playing in.

Pitcher throws the first pitch, ump calls strike.  Yeah, it was a full ball width outside, but this umpire had been around for ten years and everyone and their dog knew this guy had a wide strike zone...wide and short...he even would tell people that during games.   It wasn't a secret, and should not have been a surprise.  Nobody liked it, but it was consistent for all batters, on both teams...and ten years later he still calls that way.  

Plus, this was the last inning of the league semi-final - so not only did this batter have all season to see this ump's strike zone, he had all game...but I digress.

The batter does the old draw-a-line-in-the-sand-in-the-opposite-batters-box trick.  The umpire says, you better be swinging now.  The catcher hears this and lines up about eight inches outside.  Pitcher hits the glove "strike two".  Batter does the "come on, really?" routine, and ump says "you better be swinging".  Last pitch crosses the opposite batter's box at about eye height - "strike three".  

Bat slam, random curse word, ejection.

I'm sure it goes against any instruction any umpire has ever received, but I loved it.  There's just no upside to showing up an umpire.  Before saying or doing anything to an umpire, asking yourself what you're trying to achieve.

Having said that, I'm assuming most of you would have tossed him after the line in the sand, and bring in a new batter with one strike, rather than creating an out for the other team first?

@beerguy55 what I would like to know is did the PU catch any flak from the HC?  If he did, then the lesson was truly lost.  If the HC didn't say a word, then he understood why the calls were being made, and was supporting the PU in delivering a message- "You are NOT bigger than the game itself".  A lesson many young men & women have learned, and will continue to learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, VolUmp said:

OK.  I believe you ... but as recently as 6-8 years ago, I was told that if you call a strike above the belt in NCAA, the catcher will be quite vocal about it because the vast majority of PUs wouldn't give the high strike.  Since the grading system came into play in MLB, I can imagine there's been a sudden and drastic shift there.

I can tell you, as late as last winter/spring. Not calling the top of the zone at the NCAA level can get a lot of very important people pissed at you. Tom Hiler are George Deroches (sic) at the top of that list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stkjock said:

thanks, LU that was a good read

Not saying that I agree with everything in that article (because I don't), but it was out there and I knew it gave a good explanation of what is a FYC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, VolUmp said:

What is the top of the MLB zone?  By the book?  By tradition?

If the zone has been changed in the last 5 years because of Questech or any of the other digital systems, I'd like to know if MLB umpires have been given a mandate to call the top of the zone according to the book.  I just don't believe they do.  If they do, it's a HUGE advantage to the pitcher.  Not wrong ... just a fact.

"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."

MLB umpires have a mandate to call the zone according to the book.  In the 1990's, the top of the zone was the belt.  (If you don't believe me, go watch some games from the 1990's on the internet and try not to cringe when some pitches (that appear to be right down the middle) are called a "ball"...without an argument from anyone...because they were (apparently) an inch above the belt.)  I think because it didn't happen overnight, but rather evolved over the last approximately 15 years, that we fans of MLB don't realize just how much the strike zone has been raised since 1999.

If you don't think MLB umpires today are calling the "book zone" remember that the top of the strike zone is established as the batter is "prepared to swing" and not when he is just standing in the box.  Hence, the "midpoint" (as set forth in the rule) is closer to the ground (lower) when the pitch is being delivered than if you just look at the batter as he's standing in the box between pitches.   

The zone began to rise during Sandy Alderson's tenure as MLB V.P. for baseball operations in the very late 1990's and early 2000's.  (Sandy Alderson's views on the strike zone, umpiring (and umpires, in general), and his tenure as VP have been chronicled in the well-researched book, "As They See 'Em".)  Anyways, MLB introduced Ques-Tec (computer system) in the early 2000's in 10 different ballparks.  It was replaced by a new system which is now used in all 30 stadiums.  Despite the fact that MLB promised that Ques-Tec was only going to be used as a training aide (and not as a means to evaluate umpires) to help umpires...it quickly became an evaluation tool.  Because it is one of the largest factors used to evaluate umpires (which now determine post-season assignments), I can assure you that professional umpires (MLB & AAA) strive to call the "computer zone" which, in theory, matches the book zone.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're talking Brett Lawrie's ejection, then the 3-1 strike call on a pitch with px 1.158 (5.39' off the outer edge of home plate) makes QOCN; the 3-2 is within margin-of-error of Lawrie's top of the zone (sz_top), which is 3.407, bringing me to my next point about the pitch f/x plot: It's a generic strike zone rectangle (1.5 to 3.5 AGL), not tailored to each batter's individual height for each individual pitch. If it were a truly representative plot, there would be a unique strike zone box drawn for every single pitch to account for hollow-of-knee (sz_bot) and midpoint (sz_top) heights for each pitch. Attached is a diagram of a standard Brooks strikezone plot using Pitch f/x data; while a number of pitches are indeed missed (blue circles), others that might appear missed are actually not incorrectly called due to batter height (pink circles) or issues with the margin of error or other error (orange circle).

For more about strike zone analysis, click here for a comprehensive article on the subject. Click here to read more about Pitch f/x errors.

01-brooks-lindor.jpg

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2017 at 11:04 PM, udbrky said:

I don't like the way it was handled. I think it could have been handled way better and not looked to toss the batter. 

 

Not saying to let the batter get away with it, but this just has the feel of "well, I'm ejecting you this AB, no matter what"

I dunno, man.  I've had it happen to me.  Once.  And I I "looked to toss the batter" - and not by waiting for any more pitches.  By dumping his a-- on the spot.

For me, when that happens, it DOES have the feel of "well, I'm ejecting you this AB, no matter what."  'Cause I'm gonna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HokieUmp said:

I dunno, man.  I've had it happen to me.  Once.  And I I "looked to toss the batter" - and not by waiting for any more pitches.  By dumping his a-- on the spot.

For me, when that happens, it DOES have the feel of "well, I'm ejecting you this AB, no matter what."  'Cause I'm gonna.

That's what I meant - this has the feel of "not another word" type warnings. Either he warrants it and is dumped right there, or you make it clear to shape up or ship out, and move on.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, udbrky said:

That's what I meant - this has the feel of "not another word" type warnings. Either he warrants it and is dumped right there, or you make it clear to shape up or ship out, and move on.

Ah.  I misunderstood.  My fault.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HokieUmp said:

Ah.  I misunderstood.  My fault.

Nah, I think I should've worded it better - later on, I thought "I don't think I'm conveying fully what I meant", but that was after seeing several others say it more elegantly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2017 at 11:40 AM, lawump said:

"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."

MLB umpires have a mandate to call the zone according to the book.  In the 1990's, the top of the zone was the belt.  (If you don't believe me, go watch some games from the 1990's on the internet and try not to cringe when some pitches (that appear to be right down the middle) are called a "ball"...without an argument from anyone...because they were (apparently) an inch above the belt.)  I think because it didn't happen overnight, but rather evolved over the last approximately 15 years, that we fans of MLB don't realize just how much the strike zone has been raised since 1999.

If you don't think MLB umpires today are calling the "book zone" remember that the top of the strike zone is established as the batter is "prepared to swing" and not when he is just standing in the box.  Hence, the "midpoint" (as set forth in the rule) is closer to the ground (lower) when the pitch is being delivered than if you just look at the batter as he's standing in the box between pitches.   

The zone began to rise during Sandy Alderson's tenure as MLB V.P. for baseball operations in the very late 1990's and early 2000's.  (Sandy Alderson's views on the strike zone, umpiring (and umpires, in general), and his tenure as VP have been chronicled in the well-researched book, "As They See 'Em".)  Anyways, MLB introduced Ques-Tec (computer system) in the early 2000's in 10 different ballparks.  It was replaced by a new system which is now used in all 30 stadiums.  Despite the fact that MLB promised that Ques-Tec was only going to be used as a training aide (and not as a means to evaluate umpires) to help umpires...it quickly became an evaluation tool.  Because it is one of the largest factors used to evaluate umpires (which now determine post-season assignments), I can assure you that professional umpires (MLB & AAA) strive to call the "computer zone" which, in theory, matches the book zone.

 

 

Then again, I can show you a lot of videos of pitches at the belt to Lucas Duda or Ike Davis -- two tall Mets -- that are called balls. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheRockawayKid said:

Then again, I can show you a lot of videos of pitches at the belt to Lucas Duda or Ike Davis -- two tall Mets -- that are called balls. 

Please provide them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheRockawayKid said:

Then again, I can show you a lot of videos of pitches at the belt to Lucas Duda or Ike Davis -- two tall Mets -- that are called balls. 

Wait... Ike Davis is still in the bigs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I first looked at this thread, I didn't want to respond because of the post date and didn't wanna beat a dead horse, but here's my 2€

Bigs=gone

NCAA=prob a stern look, EJ

FED and lower=Time! "Coach, would you mind if I teach this kid a lesson?" Coach "NP". (If not he's gone in HS, lesson learned)

tell the pitcher and catcher the next pitch better not be anywhere near the strike zone  

Changes/educates that kid and others forever during one AB!  Coaches included. 

Ps: the last pitch on the video was a strike at all levels. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Tborze said:

FED and lower=Time! "Coach, would you mind if I teach this kid a lesson?" Coach "NP". (If not he's gone in HS, lesson learned)

tell the pitcher and catcher the next pitch better not be anywhere near the strike zone  

Changes/educates that kid and others forever during one AB!  Coaches included. 

Uh... huh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now