Poll on calling balls

[jkumpire]

Just curious as to what you do, or see/hear your partners do. Is it a growing trend, or are only a few doing it? My impression is that a few do, most do not, and those who do tend to work on higher levels of play.

Thanks for your help and opinions, please share why your do, or do not, and in your opinion is it a good idea,

[stkjock]

Some insights here 

 

 

[MikeSafari]

Don't do it, never have. I will have a conversation (quietly and discretely) with the catcher if he wants to ask me, but I don't announce where pitches missed. On the one hand it's the catcher's job to adjust, and on the other hand I've been taught since I was 13 not to call location.

[umpstu]

If close I will . but I will do it at the same volume as I do when calling the ball.

 

[LaskoFan]

I will give location if asked by pitcher/catcher or coach if it was close. I will honor the request much more so early in the game to establish my strike zone. I will not provide the location if I feel they are looking to argue balls all strikes. I know it is a fine line. 

[MadMax]

I never call location (nor do I ever, ever gesture or indicate where it missed, but that's not the topic of the question). If/when I do say where it missed, it is in hushed tones only the catcher and batter can hear.

[JoeC]

I don't call location. I just let the catcher know, until he misses the pitch and I get hit. Then he has to redeem himself before I let him know again.

[MidAmUmp]

I give location on close in or out pitches. Answer the question before it's asked and avoid a discussion. It's no different than safe, off the bag or on the tag, he's out. You're providing an explanation of your call.

As you mentioned, it's something done more by umpires who work at a higher level where we're under a microscope. 

[Thunderheads]

7 hours ago, MidAmUmp said:

I give location on close in or out pitches. Answer the question before it's asked and avoid a discussion. It's no different than safe, off the bag or on the tag, he's out. You're providing an explanation of your call.

As you mentioned, it's something done more by umpires who work at a higher level where we're under a microscope. 

I "liked" this post because of Jason's first comment, ..........  NOT that I work higher levels and am under a microscope

[kstrunk]

8 hours ago, MidAmUmp said:

Answer the question before it's asked and avoid a discussion.

This is working for me. Further more, I've spent this entire season (since February), intentionally observing collegiate umpires, and have noticed that MANY do call location (in or out) on close pitches, and those that do, catch less 'mouth' than those who do not. 

[catsbackr]

I call in/out, but not up/down.  They can see up/down.

[indianaumpire15]

I learned this at MidAmerican with Jason and his staff.  When you give the location on the close ones in and out you do, as Jason says, answer the question before its asked.  You also let everyone know what your judgment is on the call, and therefore anyone with half a brain knows they are arguing judgement aspects of the call from the jump.

[Stk004]

If you give location, what do you say when (if) you miss one? 

[RichMSN]

1 minute ago, Stk004 said:

If you give location, what do you say when (if) you miss one? 

Huh?

"Ball OUT"

"Ball IN"

How is that going to cause a problem you'd have without saying IN or OUT?

[Tksjewelry]

If you give location, what do you say when (if) you miss one? 

You'll be less likely to miss one if you slow down your calls. I had a championship game yesterday behind the plate and I didn't have a single snap or question from a coach or a grunt from a catcher. Slap to the glove, think - what did I see?, "ball - outside".

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[grayhawk]

I do exactly what MidAmUmp described.  It works for me.

[umpire_scott]

I have no problem with either way of doing it.  I see the point of the umpires that give location, but logically it doesn't make a ton of sense to me.  If they can see up and down and they have to see the difference between a pitch that was inside or outside them effectively you are telling them something that they should already know.  Just playing a little devils advocate if the pitch is right at the belt buckle but just outside do you say "ball out"?  That seems unnecessary.  They obviously don't think it was inside as they can at least determine what side of the plate it was on.  Or do you only do it for pitches that are borderline in both directions to distinguish whether you had it low/high, or outside?  Also what if you had a pitch that was close, but you had it missing both high and outside?  I'll give that information to a catcher if he asks; "I had it missing slightly both high and away, catch". 

[MidAmUmp]

2 hours ago, umpire_scott said:

I have no problem with either way of doing it.  I see the point of the umpires that give location, but logically it doesn't make a ton of sense to me.  If they can see up and down and they have to see the difference between a pitch that was inside or outside them effectively you are telling them something that they should already know.  Just playing a little devils advocate if the pitch is right at the belt buckle but just outside do you say "ball out"?  That seems unnecessary.  They obviously don't think it was inside as they can at least determine what side of the plate it was on.  Or do you only do it for pitches that are borderline in both directions to distinguish whether you had it low/high, or outside?  Also what if you had a pitch that was close, but you had it missing both high and outside?  I'll give that information to a catcher if he asks; "I had it missing slightly both high and away, catch". 

This is a good example of why college level umpires give location in and out. Upper level pitchers (I'm talking D1 kids) hit spots and catchers are strong enough to stick pitches (side note, I had 2 summer HS showcase games on Sunday...holy crap HS catchers are bad!!!). So a catcher slides out of the zone and sticks a belt high pitch and you just say "Ball", someone in that teams dugout will be inquiring about the location of that pitch if you don't tell them first.  

No need to give location on that one. He missed in 2 directions...that pitch isn't close.

Please don't read this as big timing anyone. This is just one of the many things that guys don't get until you work at those levels. Some of these teams think every pitch is 3-2 bottom of the 9th of game 7 of the WS.

[umpire_scott]

4 hours ago, MidAmUmp said:

No need to give location on that one. He missed in 2 directions...that pitch isn't close.

Let me further explain this one.  I've been working this year on widening my zone a little bit and getting strikes a little more off the plate.  I don't go too far but a ball and a half or so outside to me is a pitch that at the levels I do the pitcher deserves for hitting that spot.  It has been working well for me.  And I generally get no complaints when I call a ball at the belt a ball and half off the plate a strike.  Plus a ball in the middle of the plate I will generally strike if it is a little below the bottom of the knee.  But I think it is going a little too far to call a pitch a ball and a half off the plate that is also just below the knees.  So even though it actually is very close to other pitches I've called strikes in each direction since it barely missed my zone both ways I generally ball that pitch.

I guess my point is that some of the catchers are savvy enough to know that the pitch I just balled is no further outside than that belt buckle pitch I called a strike on earlier and it is also no lower than that one I called a strike that was right down the middle.  So if I just tell him it was outside that is not entirely true and I don't want him thinking that I am being inconsistent with my outside zone.

With this in mind do you think maybe calling a more rectangular zone is better than an oval?  It seems like it might be more defend-able?

[MidAmUmp]

1 hour ago, umpire_scott said:

Let me further explain this one.  I've been working this year on widening my zone a little bit and getting strikes a little more off the plate.  I don't go too far but a ball and a half or so outside to me is a pitch that at the levels I do the pitcher deserves for hitting that spot.  It has been working well for me.  And I generally get no complaints when I call a ball at the belt a ball and half off the plate a strike.  Plus a ball in the middle of the plate I will generally strike if it is a little below the bottom of the knee.  But I think it is going a little too far to call a pitch a ball and a half off the plate that is also just below the knees.  So even though it actually is very close to other pitches I've called strikes in each direction since it barely missed my zone both ways I generally ball that pitch.

I guess my point is that some of the catchers are savvy enough to know that the pitch I just balled is no further outside than that belt buckle pitch I called a strike on earlier and it is also no lower than that one I called a strike that was right down the middle.  So if I just tell him it was outside that is not entirely true and I don't want him thinking that I am being inconsistent with my outside zone.

With this in mind do you think maybe calling a more rectangular zone is better than an oval?  It seems like it might be more defend-able?

I pretty much agree with you. I think (and teach) umpires should call an octagonal strike zone. Up and out, up and in, down and out, down and in are balls. A pitch down the middle just below the knees or a pitch down the middle just under the elbow are strikes. Pitches belt high just off the plate are strikes. 

Again, if a ball misses just down and just out, I generally don't tell the dugout, but if I do, I tell them it was out. They can see down but they can't see out so use that to your benefit.

As far as dealing with the catcher is concerned:

I volunteer no information to him. If he wants to know, he'll ask. So on a just down, just out pitch he might say, "Jason, where do you have that?" I'll usually say, "Just down and just out." Sometimes they'll say that it's a good pitch and they've got to have it...at which point I get to use the old, "Would you want me to call that on you when you're batting?" Which always gets a no. To which I reply, "Well, there you go."

[Welpe]

On 6/26/2016 at 9:12 PM, MidAmUmp said:

I give location on close in or out pitches. Answer the question before it's asked and avoid a discussion. It's no different than safe, off the bag or on the tag, he's out. You're providing an explanation of your call.

As you mentioned, it's something done more by umpires who work at a higher level where we're under a microscope. 

I started doing this a few years ago after you mentioned it in a thread and have had great success with it. I don't call it on every pitch but on the close ones in/out, I will and I've yet to have an issue with it.

[Welpe]

12 hours ago, Stk004 said:

If you give location, what do you say when (if) you miss one? 

If I realize I've missed pitch just after having called it, then I know I'm working too fast and not watching the ball all the way into the glove. Not what you asked but that's what I do. 

6 hours ago, MidAmUmp said:

(side note, I had 2 summer HS showcase games on Sunday...holy crap HS catchers are bad!!!).

 

I have gotten really spoiled by the catching as a whole in this area. While there are some exceptions of ones that can't catch a cold or stick a meatball down the middle, overall the catching is quite good here. Of course I'm sure even these guys compared to what you normally see look like amateur hour in comparison.

[Kevin_K]

6 hours ago, MidAmUmp said:

I pretty much agree with you. I think (and teach) umpires should call an octagonal strike zone. Up and out, up and in, down and out, down and in are balls. A pitch down the middle just below the knees or a pitch down the middle just under the elbow are strikes. Pitches belt high just off the plate are strikes. 

Again, if a ball misses just down and just out, I generally don't tell the dugout, but if I do, I tell them it was out. They can see down but they can't see out so use that to your benefit.

As far as dealing with the catcher is concerned:

I volunteer no information to him. If he wants to know, he'll ask. So on a just down, just out pitch he might say, "Jason, where do you have that?" I'll usually say, "Just down and just out." Sometimes they'll say that it's a good pitch and they've got to have it...at which point I get to use the old, "Would you want me to call that on you when you're batting?" Which always gets a no. To which I reply, "Well, there you go."

And if he asks "Was that down?" or "Was that out?" or some other location, the answer is yes in almost every case.

[kstrunk]

I've had catchers ask 'out or down?', and on those where an inch either direction would be a strike I'll say - "It's a little too down to be that out, and a little too out to be that down." I've said that probably a half dozen times this year, and they seem to have gotten it every time. 

[scrounge]

7 hours ago, Welpe said:

I started doing this a few years ago after you mentioned it in a thread and have had great success with it. I don't call it on every pitch but on the close ones in/out, I will and I've yet to have an issue with it.

Yep, me too, with no issues. It's also helped me to visualize the outside corner, help with my timing, and it's just part of my routine now. I'm not saying it's by any means necessary - but it works for me. I don't consider this a big issue.