Explain strike zone

[Guest Confused ump]

I recently had a coach ask me to explain my strike zone to him between innings. I told him that I'm not required to, then walked away. Am I in the wrong here? Do I have to explain my strike zone when asked? 

[Stk004]

7 minutes ago, Guest Confused ump said:

I recently had a coach ask me to explain my strike zone to him between innings. I told him that I'm not required to, then walked away. Am I in the wrong here? Do I have to explain my strike zone when asked? 

"It's in the book coach." 

[Rich Ives]

1 hour ago, Guest Confused ump said:

I recently had a coach ask me to explain my strike zone to him between innings. I told him that I'm not required to, then walked away. Am I in the wrong here? Do I have to explain my strike zone when asked? 

We can usually figure it out pretty quickly.  If someone asked either he's really new or you were having an erratic day at the plate. 

[Guest Simple answer "NO"]

 

Don't play into those games, just take cae of between innings business. Have a ball ready for the catcher if it gets by him during warm-ups, have your brush ready, take care of your paperwork!

[maven]

9 hours ago, Guest Confused ump said:

I told him that I'm not required to

Though true, this response registers as confrontational. Escalating, rather than professional.

Ives is probably right: he's either newer, in which case your being confrontational makes you seem like a jackass; or he's working you, and confronting him will make things worse.

Referring to the rule book is a safe, neutral response. If he has a "snappy" retort, we can deal with that when it comes (unless it's way over the top, I'm probably just saying "thanks," and walking away).

[noumpere]

Sometimes an innocent, "What do you mean?" can do the trick.

[Man_In_Black]

This hasn't happened to me in quite a while, but the last time it did I just chuckled and said with a smile, "No really, skip...what is it you wanted to come out here and ask me about?" He looked at me funny for a few seconds and then, upon getting the hint, just turned around and walked back to the dugout.

[MidAmUmp]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

Sometimes an innocent, "What do you mean?" can do the trick.

^^^This^^^

Play dumb. What do you mean? Get him to tell you exactly where he's going with it. If he's new with no clue, then you can do the rulebook reference. If he says "Well, we're trying to figure out your zone because blah, blah, blah..." Just tell him we're not going there. Give him an official warning and if he won't drop it, run him.

Playing dumb will make you a better umpire. The higher up you go the better coaches are at twisting your words. So when they ask "What did you have on that play at 2nd?" Instead of giving them some lengthy diatribe on how he got his hand underneath the tag that takes 30 seconds to explain, ask, "What do you mean?" That gets him to ask something like "Was the tag late?" Now you have a yes/no answer that can't be twisted.

 

[Rich Ives]

26 minutes ago, MidAmUmp said:

^^^This^^^

Play dumb. What do you mean? Get him to tell you exactly where he's going with it. If he's new with no clue, then you can do the rulebook reference. If he says "Well, we're trying to figure out your zone because blah, blah, blah..." Just tell him we're not going there. Give him an official warning and if he won't drop it, run him.

Playing dumb will make you a better umpire. The higher up you go the better coaches are at twisting your words. So when they ask "What did you have on that play at 2nd?" Instead of giving them some lengthy diatribe on how he got his hand underneath the tag that takes 30 seconds to explain, ask, "What do you mean?" That gets him to ask something like "Was the tag late?" Now you have a yes/no answer that can't be twisted.

 

Might be worth listening.

[maven]

37 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

Might be worth listening.

Yes, there's a finite, non-zero probability. Like water freezing in a kettle over a fire.

[Rich Ives]

16 minutes ago, maven said:

Yes, there's a finite, non-zero probability. Like water freezing in a kettle over a fire.

Oh I forget. All umpires have a perfect strike zone, never varying a millimeter over the course of their entire career, let alone from pitch to pitch. How silly of me to think otherwise.

[scrounge]

4 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

Oh I forget. All umpires have a perfect strike zone, never varying a millimeter over the course of their entire career, let alone from pitch to pitch. How silly of me to think otherwise.

What the heck would you expect from such a conversation? And what does this rather snarky and belittling response have to do with it anyway? What 'explanation' are you seeking?

This kind of response isn't a request for information, it's a dressed up insult. This is how coaches earn the rodent title.

[stkjock]

[Richvee]

4 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

Oh I forget. All umpires have a perfect strike zone, never varying a millimeter over the course of their entire career, let alone from pitch to pitch. How silly of me to think otherwise.

yeah, and all coaches have a perfect look at the zone from the dugout and coach's boxes. How silly of me to think otherwise. It's a wonder our mechanics haven't changed to call balls and strikes from the benches. 

[JonnyCat]

My usual reply is "Oh, it effin sucks, you're going to hate it, get mad, yell at me, and then I'm going to run your dumb arse.!" Or something like that.

[KenBAZ]

Having spent 30+ years viewing pitches from the dugout or 3rd base coaches box and now having called 1,000's of games from behind the plate I can tell you that the view is so different that a coach and a plate umpire can't really talk about balls and strikes. They are literally seeing two different things.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[HokieUmp]

3 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

Oh I forget. All umpires have a perfect strike zone, never varying a millimeter over the course of their entire career, let alone from pitch to pitch. How silly of me to think otherwise.

Wow.  Really?

So, even though the rules specifically address not arguing judgement AND balls/strikes in separate places, you think we're obliged to listen to your, and your hitters, learned opinion on the zone?  Oh, and unbiased, too - I forgot to add that.  How silly of me.

[maven]

3 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

Oh I forget. All umpires have a perfect strike zone, never varying a millimeter over the course of their entire career, let alone from pitch to pitch. How silly of me to think otherwise.

That's a non sequitur, Ives. You stated that it "might be worth listening" to coach gripe about my zone. Good day or bad, listening to his griping is almost certainly not worth my time and not likely to be productive.

[grayhawk]

3 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

Oh I forget. All umpires have a perfect strike zone, never varying a millimeter over the course of their entire career, let alone from pitch to pitch. How silly of me to think otherwise.

We miss pitches.  We don't try to.  Get over it.

[scrounge]

5 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

Oh I forget. All umpires have a perfect strike zone, never varying a millimeter over the course of their entire career, let alone from pitch to pitch. How silly of me to think otherwise.

I tell you what, though....I'll sit there and listen like a chump about you demanding an 'explanation' - and that's what it is, a childish demanding of satisfaction, not a quest for knowledge - if you sit there and give me an explanation for that crap-ass lineup that couldn't hit a barn today, or the 2B you insist on playing despite having 2 left feet, or why you pulled your starter and put in a bum who gives up 5 runs, or sent that runner who got thrown out by 15 feet, or why you're bunting in the bottom of the 7th down 3 runs and giving away one of your three remaining outs, or calling for a curve that ended up going to the backstop with a runner on 3rd in a tie game when you know this kid has had control issues all day, or......

Deal?

[umpire_scott]

21 hours ago, scrounge said:

I tell you what, though....I'll sit there and listen like a chump about you demanding an 'explanation' - and that's what it is, a childish demanding of satisfaction, not a quest for knowledge - if you sit there and give me an explanation for that crap-ass lineup that couldn't hit a barn today, or the 2B you insist on playing despite having 2 left feet, or why you pulled your starter and put in a bum who gives up 5 runs, or sent that runner who got thrown out by 15 feet, or why you're bunting in the bottom of the 7th down 3 runs and giving away one of your three remaining outs, or calling for a curve that ended up going to the backstop with a runner on 3rd in a tie game when you know this kid has had control issues all day, or......

Deal?

You checked off three things I saw coaches do this weekend that had me shaking my head.

[Rich Ives]

23 hours ago, maven said:

That's a non sequitur, Ives. You stated that it "might be worth listening" to coach gripe about my zone. Good day or bad, listening to his griping is almost certainly not worth my time and not likely to be productive.

So your zone is always perfect so you brush off a comment that maybe you should consider that it isn't always?

[umpire_scott]

If you can tell the difference between a tomato and an elephant, then you can tell the difference between a newbie coach that simply wants to get a feel for your zone (some call the top of the zone a little more and some call the bottom, etc) and a coach that is working you.  If it's in the middle of the game it is almost certainly the latter.  I almost always say I call the zone as it's defined in the book.  But in either case I agree with Maven, don't say anything that comes across as confrontational.  Some view defensiveness as a sign of guilt or uncertainty.

I have had some young catchers innocently ask me before the game what my zone is.  I usually just reply "I call the entire zone, letters to bottom of knee over the entire plate."  I know that technically "letters" is not part of the defined zone, but a 12 year old is going to here "the mid-point between, blah, blah, blah."  

[maven]

So your zone is always perfect so you brush off a comment that maybe you should consider that it isn't always?

Which part of "good day or bad" from my post is perplexing you? RIFF.

[umpire_scott]

On 7/20/2016 at 0:10 AM, Rich Ives said:

We can usually figure it out pretty quickly.  If someone asked either he's really new or you were having an erratic day at the plate. 

Rich, 

You really think that a third option that he can't see the zone from where he's at and/or it trying to intimidate the umpire into giving his pitchers calls is not on the table?  You are either giving coaches way too much credit or not enough.