What is the official strike zone for a pitched ball?

[Doug Romrell]

Umpires, put what you think the zone ought to be aside and simply call the zone as it is officially described.

 

[MTR]

He told the coaches that his zone was knees to waist and black to black.

That is a shame, you shouldn't have to put up with such a deviated strike zone. At least the one I noted gave the pitcher the same area, just a different configuration that benefits both teams.

I answered this earlier in this thread. Kinda like your semi annual post reference. I might not like it but I will respect it as long as it is the same for all batters on both teams. Again, I didn't say where the zone had to be. I said it needed to be the same during the game for everyone.

I support consistency, but the zone cannot be the same for every batter as every batter and their stance is not the same. Even the perception of different pitches may alter your belief of what is the same for one being the same for the other. Just sayin'

I don't call the game anymore. In fact I am just a parent now. However, I don't see how that would be a hardship on calling the game. Information is a good thing and can only serve to aid you. Would you need to adapt? Sure, but you have to adapt in some form every game anyway so what's the difference? These days I record pitches, keep score, and work with my DD. I help her practice the organization philosophy in situations. This is where the 0-2 or 1-2 pitch off the plate comes from.

There is no doubt that unless the pitcher has overwhelming speed on a pitch that the batters cannot handle, the 2-strike pitch with an even or advantageous count should always be something the batter would have to chase to hit. I've had pitchers just lob it up there, with intent (not a change-up) of being short, hoping the batter's eagerness to protect the plate will get the better of her judgment. That can be a real fun situation for a good pitcher

But my point is that an umpire should just umpire the game, not give clinics or coach especially if announcing their plans to blatantly ignore the rules. How would you feel if the umpire stated that to reduce injuries, he will give the infielders the neighborhood takes or separation from the base? You may think you will adjust, but when you have a couple deuces against your team when it was obvious the defense wasn't even close to touching the base while holding the ball, your knowledge may get the better of you.

 

[MTR]

For some reason, I think it is pretty easy to determine the location of the top of the sternum for most women.

Maybe it is just me.

The top isn't as difficult to determine, but the rule book notes the bottom of the sternum, not the top.

This question reminds me of the great theological debate of "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Same answer I've given since 8th grade and the nuns didn't like it then, "as many as you choose to imagine".

Umpires, put what you think the zone ought to be aside and simply call the zone as it is officially described.

Doug, as noted, it isn't what is "thought", but how it is trained. I have little doubt that if you let good pitcher's live high and low on the river, the game is back to 1-0 10+ inning games in a heartbeat.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

This question reminds me of the great theological debate of "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

That depends on what kind of dance they are doing...

 

[cuzmail]

That is a shame, you shouldn't have to put up with such a deviated strike zone. At least the one I noted gave the pitcher the same area, just a different configuration that benefits both teams.

Not sure if you are serious here or not, but I didn't have a problem with it. Sure I would like a postage stamp zone when we are hitting and a generous zone when we are pitching but that just isn't the real world.

I support consistency, but the zone cannot be the same for every batter as every batter and their stance is not the same. Even the perception of different pitches may alter your belief of what is the same for one being the same for the other. Just sayin'.

Just sayin' - the anatomy doesn't change only the height of that anatomy. I believe I said this previously in the thread.

There is no doubt that unless the pitcher has overwhelming speed on a pitch that the batters cannot handle, the 2-strike pitch with an even or advantageous count should always be something the batter would have to chase to hit. I've had pitchers just lob it up there, with intent (not a change-up) of being short, hoping the batter's eagerness to protect the plate will get the better of her judgment. That can be a real fun situation for a good pitcher

Agreed and fun to watch.

But my point is that an umpire should just umpire the game, not give clinics or coach especially if announcing their plans to blatantly ignore the rules. How would you feel if the umpire stated that to reduce injuries, he will give the infielders the neighborhood takes or separation from the base? You may think you will adjust, but when you have a couple deuces against your team when it was obvious the defense wasn't even close to touching the base while holding the ball, your knowledge may get the better of you.

Well here you present a novel concept regarding not ignoring the rules. We all know and expect the umpire to have his/her specific zone regardless of how it is written in the book. I do believe that this is generally accepted. However, the later drifting and context the paragraph strays to is so far out of the reality of the game that it doesn't even apply.

 

[BretMan]

(The umpire) told the coaches that his zone was knees to waist and black to black.

Then this guy is screwing up on several counts.

His first mistake was describing "his" strike zone to the coaches before the game. Well-trained umpires are trained not to do that.

His next mistake was describing a strike zone that is GROSSLY different than what the rules describe. I wouldn't be surprised if a coach started giving him grief right then and there. There are enough opportunities to get yourself into trouble during a game. Why give the coaches more ammo by opening your trap when you're not supposed to.

Even more ammo...if I'm a coach and an umpire tells me this, I'm going to wonder what other rules he might decide to "bend" during the game. I'm also going to wonder if this is just his own personal interpretation (or, misinterpretation, actually) or if he really just doesn't know the the rules.

This umpire has started the game off giving the coaches reason to question his rule knowledge and ability before a single pitch is even thrown. Why even plant that seed of doubt in the coach's minds? His credibility is sinking right off the bat.

The rest of the ammo clip...suppose during the game he calls a strike on a pitch that's up to the belly button (above the waist). Even though this is a legitimate strike in any rule book, he told you before the game it wouldn't be. The impression this can leave is that not only is the umpire incompetent, he is also a liar.

When an umpire steps on the field, all he has to stand on is his own credibility. Why undermine it by telling coaches things you're not supposed to be telling them in the first place? You might think you're heading off trouble by saying stuff like this, but it's every bit as likely to backfire and end up causing more trouble that you think you're avoiding.

 

[cuzmail]

Then this guy is screwing up on several counts.

His first mistake was describing "his" strike zone to the coaches before the game. Well-trained umpires are trained not to do that.

His next mistake was describing a strike zone that is GROSSLY different than what the rules describe. I wouldn't be surprised if a coach started giving him grief right then and there. There are enough opportunities to get yourself into trouble during a game. Why give the coaches more ammo by opening your trap when you're not supposed to.

Even more ammo...if I'm a coach and an umpire tells me this, I'm going to wonder what other rules he might decide to "bend" during the game. I'm also going to wonder if this is just his own personal interpretation (or, misinterpretation, actually) or if he really just doesn't know the the rules.

This umpire has started the game off giving the coaches reason to question his rule knowledge and ability before a single pitch is even thrown. Why even plant that seed of doubt in the coach's minds? His credibility is sinking right off the bat.

The rest of the ammo clip...suppose during the game he calls a strike on a pitch that's up to the belly button (above the waist). Even though this is a legitimate strike in any rule book, he told you before the game it wouldn't be. The impression this can leave is that not only is the umpire incompetent, he is also a liar.

When an umpire steps on the field, all he has to stand on is his own credibility. Why undermine it by telling coaches things you're not supposed to be telling them in the first place? You might think you're heading off trouble by saying stuff like this, but it's every bit as likely to backfire and end up causing more trouble that you think you're avoiding.

Thanks. Pretty much what Comp said.