Jump to content

In this thread, we post LLWS observations

grayhawk

By grayhawk
in Youth Recreation Ball

 Share
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 4581 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

dumbdumb

dumbdumb

Posted
Posted

Fortunately or unfortunately, I am able to see a wide variety of levels of play, slowest to fastest. I have seen bad obvious misses (go ahead and pick the worst we have seen from the MLB guys since many many seem to agree it should never happen at this level for some reason) at all levels, by all levels of greatness of the umpire in question. I have seen bad misses by the worst in the rankings and the same bad misses by the best in the rankings. The only difference is that those that are lower in the rankings make "more" obvious bad misses than those that are higher in the rankings. This observation has stood the test of time.

 

I believe it was a MLBU who said something like he thought he had only missed 2 or 3 pitches in a game, but the Zone evaluator showed he missed in double figures. If that is happening at the fastest level of play, it statistically has to be happening at all speeds of play. So, whatever strike zone is employed by the umpire, who is using the same definition that we all are, pitch F/x would show how all umpires are missing more than they think they are, if every level of speed were set up for pitch f/x. Many many times, although we all know what the book says the zone is and we all agree, if we were to go out and have pitch F/x we would all see quite a lot of variations amongst each persons strike zone although we all agreed what we would and would not call. One umpire who clearly sees some (not all) of the ball just nick the white on the corner pitch, another umpire sees with his eyes as being clearly 2 inches off the plate. Some umpire that makes the whole ball get the plate on the corner pitch in another umpires opinion, clearly sees that pitch just barely nicking the corner. There is nothing anyone can do for these discrepancies, especially without a tool like pitch f/x to give some guidance, and even then we can now see that there is still quite a variance, even with some guidance.

 

Usually, for better or worse as far as an umpire having a small zone or wide zone, the best thing is for them to be as consistent as possible within that zone that day. And of course, no matter what we do, there will be some that are better than others no matter the amount of time that can be put in towards being the best there ever was. Crap happens. Just be glad if you rank highly at whatever the speed of play you have progressed to and be glad you have been able to be better within the time commitment life allows you. Many could improve more if they had more time, but unfortunately they cannot get the time needed to improve to the level of others who either have a quicker learning and improvement curve or who can devote the maximum amount of time needed to substantially improve.

 

And unfortunately, just as in life, some may never make it past the bottom wrung on the ladder, no matter how hard they try or the amount of work they put in. That is why it is called life.

  • Replies 418
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Thunderheads
Thunderheads

wow, 6 points!!!

blue23ll
blue23ll

I know, most of us have done it too. Take it back a notch, scooter.

MidAmUmp
MidAmUmp

I'm an umpire, not a ball boy. Give the ball to a coach or the dugout. It's not my job to hold onto baseballs.

Rich Ives

Rich Ives

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

I'm watching MI vs Czech Republic right now and the gal on the plate (Cynthia is her name, I believe) is doing a very good job,  Maybe a little robotic, but she's solid, has a good zone and no quirks.  She's representing well.

She called the no-hitter last week in the CA/MI game and is blogging about the series:

http://2013llws.blogspot.com/

 

 

She has the LF line Wednesday at 8.

 

Check out this article on Jose Concesco bashing the LLWS umpires. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jose-canseco-trashes-little-league-world-series-umpires-on-twitter-081713

 

 

 

He's an @$$clown       :FIRE:

 

 

His delivery is, well, stupid, but the pictures shown with that article show how wide the zone has been for some of these umpires.  

 

I don't get why these people feel the need to call strikes this far off the plate.  Perhaps they don't realize they are...

 

 

 

Maybe they look at internet umpire sites and see folks saying it's OK to call a pitch 2 balls off the plate a strike.

 

For those who have advocated this, that's what one looks like.   Still think it should be called?  :insertevillaughhere:

  • Like 1
KLAH316

KLAH316

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

I'm watching MI vs Czech Republic right now and the gal on the plate (Cynthia is her name, I believe) is doing a very good job,  Maybe a little robotic, but she's solid, has a good zone and no quirks.  She's representing well.

She called the no-hitter last week in the CA/MI game and is blogging about the series:

http://2013llws.blogspot.com/

 

 

She has the LF line Wednesday at 8.

 

Check out this article on Jose Concesco bashing the LLWS umpires. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jose-canseco-trashes-little-league-world-series-umpires-on-twitter-081713

 

 

 

He's an @$$clown       :FIRE:

 

 

His delivery is, well, stupid, but the pictures shown with that article show how wide the zone has been for some of these umpires.  

 

I don't get why these people feel the need to call strikes this far off the plate.  Perhaps they don't realize they are...

 

 

 

Maybe they look at internet umpire sites and see folks saying it's OK to call a pitch 2 balls off the plate a strike.

 

For those who have advocated this, that's what one looks like.   Still think it should be called?  :insertevillaughhere:

 

Little League = Shin to Shoulders, Line to Line

:fuel:

RichMSN

RichMSN

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

I'm watching MI vs Czech Republic right now and the gal on the plate (Cynthia is her name, I believe) is doing a very good job,  Maybe a little robotic, but she's solid, has a good zone and no quirks.  She's representing well.

She called the no-hitter last week in the CA/MI game and is blogging about the series:

http://2013llws.blogspot.com/

 

 

She has the LF line Wednesday at 8.

 

Check out this article on Jose Concesco bashing the LLWS umpires. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jose-canseco-trashes-little-league-world-series-umpires-on-twitter-081713

 

 

 

He's an @$$clown       :FIRE:

 

 

His delivery is, well, stupid, but the pictures shown with that article show how wide the zone has been for some of these umpires.  

 

I don't get why these people feel the need to call strikes this far off the plate.  Perhaps they don't realize they are...

 

 

 

Maybe they look at internet umpire sites and see folks saying it's OK to call a pitch 2 balls off the plate a strike.

 

For those who have advocated this, that's what one looks like.   Still think it should be called?  :insertevillaughhere:

 

 

I have never seen anyone advocate two BASKETBALLS off the plate, though.

  • Like 1
mstaylor

mstaylor

Posted
Posted

Fortunately or unfortunately, I am able to see a wide variety of levels of play, slowest to fastest. I have seen bad obvious misses (go ahead and pick the worst we have seen from the MLB guys since many many seem to agree it should never happen at this level for some reason) at all levels, by all levels of greatness of the umpire in question. I have seen bad misses by the worst in the rankings and the same bad misses by the best in the rankings. The only difference is that those that are lower in the rankings make "more" obvious bad misses than those that are higher in the rankings. This observation has stood the test of time.

 

I believe it was a MLBU who said something like he thought he had only missed 2 or 3 pitches in a game, but the Zone evaluator showed he missed in double figures. If that is happening at the fastest level of play, it statistically has to be happening at all speeds of play. So, whatever strike zone is employed by the umpire, who is using the same definition that we all are, pitch F/x would show how all umpires are missing more than they think they are, if every level of speed were set up for pitch f/x. Many many times, although we all know what the book says the zone is and we all agree, if we were to go out and have pitch F/x we would all see quite a lot of variations amongst each persons strike zone although we all agreed what we would and would not call. One umpire who clearly sees some (not all) of the ball just nick the white on the corner pitch, another umpire sees with his eyes as being clearly 2 inches off the plate. Some umpire that makes the whole ball get the plate on the corner pitch in another umpires opinion, clearly sees that pitch just barely nicking the corner. There is nothing anyone can do for these discrepancies, especially without a tool like pitch f/x to give some guidance, and even then we can now see that there is still quite a variance, even with some guidance.

 

Usually, for better or worse as far as an umpire having a small zone or wide zone, the best thing is for them to be as consistent as possible within that zone that day. And of course, no matter what we do, there will be some that are better than others no matter the amount of time that can be put in towards being the best there ever was. Crap happens. Just be glad if you rank highly at whatever the speed of play you have progressed to and be glad you have been able to be better within the time commitment life allows you. Many could improve more if they had more time, but unfortunately they cannot get the time needed to improve to the level of others who either have a quicker learning and improvement curve or who can devote the maximum amount of time needed to substantially improve.

 

And unfortunately, just as in life, some may never make it past the bottom wrung on the ladder, no matter how hard they try or the amount of work they put in. That is why it is called life.

I agree we all miss pitches, we all have our physical perception of the zone, and catchers affect our zone but there is also the philosophy of the youth strikezone. Even here many expound  the idea that a big zone is necessary to work youth baseball. Many believe that calling six inches off the plate, in the dirt and at the shoulders should be the norm because the pitchers are not talented enough otherwise. I disagree, and will even do so vehemently. :) I call basically the same zone at all levels, maybe a little farther up for 60ft but not much. Width stays the same. I has always felt that calling an exaggerated zone is counterproductive and teaches bad habits. Now to further that belief, at regionals and WS the players are good enough to use a real zone and have no need for a stupidly wide zone. 

  • Like 3
Rich Ives

Rich Ives

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm watching MI vs Czech Republic right now and the gal on the plate (Cynthia is her name, I believe) is doing a very good job,  Maybe a little robotic, but she's solid, has a good zone and no quirks.  She's representing well.

She called the no-hitter last week in the CA/MI game and is blogging about the series:

http://2013llws.blogspot.com/

 

 

She has the LF line Wednesday at 8.

 

Check out this article on Jose Concesco bashing the LLWS umpires. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jose-canseco-trashes-little-league-world-series-umpires-on-twitter-081713

 

 

 

He's an @$$clown       :FIRE:

 

 

His delivery is, well, stupid, but the pictures shown with that article show how wide the zone has been for some of these umpires.  

 

I don't get why these people feel the need to call strikes this far off the plate.  Perhaps they don't realize they are...

 

 

 

Maybe they look at internet umpire sites and see folks saying it's OK to call a pitch 2 balls off the plate a strike.

 

For those who have advocated this, that's what one looks like.   Still think it should be called?  :insertevillaughhere:

 

Little League = Shin to Shoulders, Line to Line

:fuel:

 

 

 

Line to line is OK. Line is 4" from the plate. Ball is 3" in diameter. Thus if the ball is within the lines it is at most 1" off being a strike.

zm1283

zm1283

Posted
Posted

The funny thing in that video of the three called strikes with the catcher setting up in the batter's box: The third strike was the closest pitch of the at-bat and the catcher was set up completely in the LH batter's box.  The first two were not even close to being strikes, even at the youth level.

maineump

maineump

Posted
Posted

The funny thing in that video of the three called strikes with the catcher setting up in the batter's box: The third strike was the closest pitch of the at-bat and the catcher was set up completely in the LH batter's box.  The first two were not even close to being strikes, even at the youth level.

I was watching the game, and the overhead shot of the strike zone was very revealing. He called strikes that were clearly in the other box and missed the inside strikes. Looked like he was calling the glove and not the ball. Even the announcers picked up on it - the poor kids from Mexico was throwing a pretty good curve (more of a slurve), and he never called it on the inside, but gave the HUGE outside.

My thought is - establish the strike zone early and don't change it every half inning - must have been frustrating for the pitchers and coaches.

The guy in the second game (US) had an easy job, the kids were bringing it and throwing strikes - he just jump around a lot (maybe he was excited).

maineump

maineump

Posted
Posted

does LL use Fed guidelines for mound visits? I swear I saw the Panama coach make two visits in the first inning but wasn't watching close enough to be sure

No they don't - I believe it is 3rd in inning or 4 in a game. That resets for each pitcher.

MidAmUmp

MidAmUmp

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm watching MI vs Czech Republic right now and the gal on the plate (Cynthia is her name, I believe) is doing a very good job,  Maybe a little robotic, but she's solid, has a good zone and no quirks.  She's representing well.

She called the no-hitter last week in the CA/MI game and is blogging about the series:

http://2013llws.blogspot.com/

 

 

She has the LF line Wednesday at 8.

 

Check out this article on Jose Concesco bashing the LLWS umpires. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jose-canseco-trashes-little-league-world-series-umpires-on-twitter-081713

 

 

 

He's an @$$clown       :FIRE:

 

 

His delivery is, well, stupid, but the pictures shown with that article show how wide the zone has been for some of these umpires.  

 

I don't get why these people feel the need to call strikes this far off the plate.  Perhaps they don't realize they are...

 

 

 

Maybe they look at internet umpire sites and see folks saying it's OK to call a pitch 2 balls off the plate a strike.

 

For those who have advocated this, that's what one looks like.   Still think it should be called?  :insertevillaughhere:

 

Little League = Shin to Shoulders, Line to Line

:fuel:

 

 

 

Line to line is OK. Line is 4" from the plate. Ball is 3" in diameter. Thus if the ball is within the lines it is at most 1" off being a strike.

 

 

When people say call batter's box to batter's box, they are talking about a regulation field.  Line to line on a regulation size field would be 2 balls off the plate - 6" from the plate to the box and the ball is just less than 3" in diameter.

 

Dealing with youth games, call hittable pitches strikes.  Some of these umpires are calling unhittable pitches.

Samwhich169

Samwhich169

Posted
Posted

Okay I have a question with the calls that are over turned and the way in which they are handled. When a bang bang play happens (and the almost certain challange that comes with it) the coach comes out to appeal it. He doesn't go to the umpire who made the call but to the plate umpire. The plate umpire then walks with the coach over to the replay monitors and stands there with the plate umpire. Why? Why can't he stand somewhere else, like the dugout. He has made his "challange" now stay out of the way. When MLB does it you don't see the challanging manager go down the tunnels with the crew to look at the replay. The LL coach should remain with his team. I also think that it would be good to have the umpire that made the "disputed call" be with the plate umpire as this all goes down instead of cutting him off completly.

 

Secondly I have seen multiple replays now where I am not sure that the call should have been overturned. I watched one where there was a bang bang play at first. The runner was called safe and then the replay process started. As I watched ESPN show the replay several, SEVERAL, times I honestly could not tell. The play was so close...even the announcers stated that they were not sure. Then after a long delay the plate umpire raised his hand and called the runner out. I thought calls were only to be overturned if the call was "blatanly incorrect" and could been obviously seen in the replay. It almost appears that LL is doing everything it can to have calls reversed for the sake of "hey look at us, we are using replay.....hey did we mention we are using replay!"

 

I am not trying to beat up on the idea of LL using the replay process. I am just a paid observer who has been watching these games at home and I cringe everytime there is even a close call. I have tried putting myself in these umpires shoes. How would I feel to not be involved in a replay regarding a call I made? Then watching the replay from all the 30 different views and seeing it for myself. If I had made a call and had it changed by another umpire it would be tough to take. Especially some of those that you just can't tell one way or the other during the replay viewings.

 

Is this just more or have other people noticed this to?

basejester

basejester

Posted
Posted

 

Line to line is OK. Line is 4" from the plate. Ball is 3" in diameter. Thus if the ball is within the lines it is at most 1" off being a strike.

 

 

When people say call batter's box to batter's box, they are talking about a regulation field.  Line to line on a regulation size field would be 2 balls off the plate - 6" from the plate to the box and the ball is just less than 3" in diameter.

 

Dealing with youth games, call hittable pitches strikes.  Some of these umpires are calling unhittable pitches.

 

Really?  You don't think they'd be talking about the actual lines on the field in question?

Rich Ives

Rich Ives

Posted
Posted

 

does LL use Fed guidelines for mound visits? I swear I saw the Panama coach make two visits in the first inning but wasn't watching close enough to be sure

No they don't - I believe it is 3rd in inning or 4 in a game. That resets for each pitcher.

 

 

Correct.

dumbdumb

dumbdumb

Posted
Posted

The first reversal was a good reversal, the second one was way to hard  to tell.

And the criteria for changing any call should be 110% sure, not just preponderance of the evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt. I believe he missed it, is not good enough. Later if some photographer standing right on it, shows a still shot of a miss by an inch, oh well. Way to hard to tell would not be overturned no matter what.

mstaylor

mstaylor

Posted
Posted

 

The first reversal was a good reversal, the second one was way to hard  to tell.

And the criteria for changing any call should be 110% sure, not just preponderance of the evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt. I believe he missed it, is not good enough. Later if some photographer standing right on it, shows a still shot of a miss by an inch, oh well. Way to hard to tell would not be overturned no matter what.

 

Agreed, saying it looks like probably,maybe it was the other way is not a reason to overturn it. You have to be able to look at it, three times max, plus a slow-mo and decide it needs to overturned. The first was easy, U1 just got a bad line to see the play. The second was as close as it gets and after several very slow mos, you still can't say definitively either way, so whatever way he called it should have stood. 

  • Like 1
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...