I went to St. X and officiate football for several years. I expected more from them, so probably didn't help them at all. I stopped having their games when I started knowing the players who went to school with my son.

That was officiated.

The ump in Post #26 expands strike zone by 6 inches in width. What does BGP readers think about this?

 

As long as it is the same on both teams and throughout the game.

 

So then in basketball it's OK if an official calls a shot a 3 pointer if the shooter is 6 inches inside the 3 point line?

So then in basketball it's OK if an official calls a shot a 3 pointer if the shooter is 6 inches inside the 3 point line?

 

Different sports

Different sports

 

 

Thought process is EXACTLY the same though. If a pitch is 6 inches off the plate it's a ball...a player is 6 inches in front of the 3 point line it's a 2 pointer, by rule. So my question still stands, if one is ok is the other?

 

And I get it, if an ump is in a 17-0 game in the second inning calling a game where one team is just gosh awful, the strike zone gets bigger to get that game over with. And most everyone probably agrees with that, even the losing coach. We all know that's going to happen. And it's also easier to get away with than my basketball example.

Thought process is EXACTLY the same though. If a pitch is 6 inches off the plate it's a ball...a player is 6 inches in front of the 3 point line it's a 2 pointer, by rule. So my question still stands, if one is ok is the other?

 

And I get it, if an ump is in a 17-0 game in the second inning calling a game where one team is just gosh awful, the strike zone gets bigger to get that game over with. And most everyone probably agrees with that, even the losing coach. We all know that's going to happen. And it's also easier to get away with than my basketball example.

 

A better comparison is a foul call. Each official is different but if it is called consistent throughout the game teams can adjust.

Nobody should have to adjust. These officials should be trained enough to know when a strike is a strike and call it a strike. Kids are taught to swing at strikes, not balls.

Nobody should have to adjust. These officials should be trained enough to know when a strike is a strike and call it a strike. Kids are taught to swing at strikes, not balls.

 

Trained or not, umpires have different strike zones.

Trained or not, umpires have different strike zones.

 

Different from each other or different from the umpire wannabes in the stands? :sssh:

Different from each other or different from the umpire wannabes in the stands? :sssh:

 

Lol. Both.

Sat in stands Monday next to 9th Region, Ohio, and multiple college conference ump. Enjoyed conversations immensely. His strike zone for HS is inside white line to inside white line. His college strike zone is black to black. Different game at different levels. Problem for me, especially in critical situations in Districts/Regionals.

That's my point. Umpires get so upset when coaches argue balls and strikes, but they cause it by making balls and strikes a judgment call. They should be trained better in knowing what to look for on each kind of pitch and it should be automatic at this point on what a strike is. They put all these rules in to make sure coaches don't get out of line with umpires, but they don't put the same effort into making sure umpires are more qualified. These coaches get judged on wins and losses which can be decided by one bad call.

I'm amazed that so many people like to argue about balls/strikes when they aren't in any position to see it.

Maybe plate umps should have cameras mounted on their masks and their view shown on big video screens. Maybe an in game app to crowd-source the calls.

They are always looking for officials

 

Officiating Information | Kentucky High School Athletic Association

They are always looking for officials

 

Officiating Information | Kentucky High School Athletic Association

 

They need to put some effort into the ones they have. We need an oversight committee, and a way for these umpires to get better every year. They do that with coaches. An oversight committee will give coaches a place to voice concerns. Right now, all they have is an assigning secretary, which is pointless. Just "scratching" someone doesn't help the situation. A committee can hold these guys accountable, they can have a convention every year to find new ways to get better, and it will also cut down on "on-field" confrontation because coaches will know they have a place to go if something isn't right.