Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

[slinger45]

It really bothers me

1 - Its too high, if youve watched a game nothing gets called more than a little above the belt.

2 - This is one really irks me, in real life you get basically a ball extra on each edge but in the game you have to have the majority of the ball go through the zone...so if you only clip the zone its a ball....and just in case you're wondering ive tried it with the umpires zones being "perfect" and thats still the case.

[Sunjah_Khan]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

Okay, I have to join Skip Carey here! The strike zone should be what it is in the rulebook, which states the top as a midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the belt (or top of the pants).

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/definition_terms_2****p

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/
definition_terms_2.
j
s
p

This does work if you LITERALLY just copy and paste it in the address bar, I don't know why this site keeps changing it and causing the 'dead link' to happen. Sorry.

(here is the site for cut and paste, the link above keeps changing it to a dead link, and I don't know why, but I had to split it so it would stop TURNING INTO a link, and then changing the last part to make it dead)

The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the knee cap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.

That fact that real life umps quit calling anything above the belt should not matter. They are strikes. I wish that MLB The Show actually went a little higher, as they seem to cut it off a less than half-way up.

It should be what it is, not what the (money-driven) modern game has made it.

[EnigmaNemesis]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

It was higher in the past, people complained, so they took a happy medium and split the middle this year it appears.

The strike zone is fine. I see plenty of "high strike" umpires out there in real life.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I'm also pretty sure that it states in the rule book, that the strike zone is allowed to be interpreted by an umpire, however he chooses.

I'm 99% on that. Or at least 99% that umpires are given the power, by rule, to implement a discretionary strike zone.

It doesn't help the discussion much, as I'd like to see it lowered in the video game myself, but figured I'd share that.

[Sunjah_Khan]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I do not think they do have any rules stating that an Umpire can interpret the strike zone (or change it). It has just evolved that way over thousands and thousands of games.
=======================================
9.02
(a) Any umpire’s decision which involves judgment, such as, but not limited to,
whether a batted ball is fair or foul, whether a pitch is a strike or a ball, or whether a
runner is safe or out, is final. No player, manager, coach or substitute shall object to
any such judgment decisions.
========================================
It does say this about strikes, but it never says that they have the ability/right to change what the strike zone is, which is clearly defined as what is stated a few posts above. Umpires change it on their own, but no rule says they have the right to do so.

The quotes from above are from the Official 2011 MLB Rulebook.

[slinger45]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

the width thing bothers me much more than the height...should be wider in the game

[Shield]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

the width thing bothers me much more than the height...should be wider in the game

I haven't seen this yet but it annoyed in mlb 09 the show. I think it's fine.

[slinger45]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

if they had the strike zone of the show in real life for the corners, walks would go up considerably

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I can't find the specific quote from the specific book I was reading, but here's a link to a website (who's quotes included I cannot personally verify), that discusses the circumstances in which an umpire feels that the strike zone, by rule, is intended to be interpreted. Not uniformly followed...mainly due the rule's vagueness.

http://uncommonreaction.blogspot.com/2010/02/epistemology-of-strikezone.html

[AUTiger1]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I don't think the strike zone is low enough. It bugs the heck out of me when I'm using a guy like Tim Hudson (who doesn't have the stuff to pitch up) and I'm constanting nailing the bottom of the strike zone (according to the on screen display) but they keep getting called balls.

I think the width is fine. It seems to me that a fair number of pitches just off the edge are called strikes and balls.

[kehlis]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I don't think the solution is changing the strike zone.

For years I have wanted a lower strike zone but I've come to the conclusion that they should just have the umpires call their own strike zone (I have it turned off during pitches anyway).

I would have no problem with umpires calling strikes an inch of the black at a consistent level regardless of what the hard coded strike zone says.

[Sunjah_Khan]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I can't find the specific quote from the specific book I was reading, but here's a link to a website (who's quotes included I cannot personally verify), that discusses the circumstances in which an umpire feels that the strike zone, by rule, is intended to be interpreted. Not uniformly followed...mainly due the rule's vagueness.

http://uncommonreaction.blogspot.com...trikezone.html

Nice article, quite interesting.

I don't try to diminish baseball, or umpires, but things like they have for pro-tennis, the laser lines crossing the boundaries to have a clear designation of a ball in or out, would do worlds for baseball. In a sense, Questech, or whatever that things was called. The guys on Sunday Night Baseball (still can't believe they replaced them, worst announcer move I might have ever seen) have said that their K-Zone is accurate to within something like 2/5 of an inch. That is pretty incredibly close.

I know umpires aren't going anywhere for a while, but I do think one day the strike zone will be laser/computer/radar controlled. I think it will only help. I love baseball, the system works, most of the time, but anyone who watched the Florida Marlins beat the Atlanta Braves in a joke of a game in the 1997 NLCS (and not many say it, but that game played a MAJOR role as to why the Marlins beat the Braves to go to the World Series) in which Eric Gregg had the most ludicrous and ridiculous EXCUSE for something called a strike zone I have ever witnessed. It was as though a player with one foot over the NBA 3-point line, and one foot within the 3-point line was given credit for a 3 pointer, or a football player clearly catching the ball on a bounce and even using replay but the referee still calls it a catch. That was, without doubt, the biggest joke I have ever witnessed of a professional sporting event. If you watch closely, he is dancing all about as he calls strikeouts, etc., that latitude cause him to, at least for that game, become the center of attention and he flaunted it. Only problem was, some pitches that were 8 to 12 inches away from the plate were called strikes. It was an insult to the integrity of the game.

If the zone were done better (like the tennis laser system), things like Eric Gregg's changing of the entire World Series in 1997 would not happen, or at least not to the level they do now.

By the way, I always liked the guy (Gregg) as an ump, and thought it was terrible he was one of those NOT hired back after that dumb umpire mass resignation-stunt. I thought he was a good umpire, and was never given another chance, but people like CB Buckner are continually employed in the game (I don't dislike CB Buckner, per say, but the guy is probably the worst judgment umpire I have ever seen. I have seen sooooooooooo many calls that are clearly one way, and he calls it the opposite, plus his strike zone changes from pitch-to-pitch, let alone game-to-game).

Who knows, but I think K-Zone type technology will eventually take over.

I also think the 1997 World Series was a joke, and things like the Royals in game #6 of 1985 are understandable. We're humans and it happens. That JOKE of a strike zone that continued all game long and changed baseball history is inexcusable (and it did seem to happen quite drastically for one side and not the other). I think, anyway.

[NDAlum]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I want nothing about baseball to change

[spitoon]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I've always thought The Show's strike zone was too high. They seem to have lowered it a little bit this year.

I think it would be a little more realistic if they 'rounded off' the corners.

I've said this before in another thread, but the only real 'problem' that I have with the zone this year is the inconsistency of the variable zone. It would be cool to learn after a couple innings that the umpire is simply not going to give you that pitch at the bottom of the zone...as it is now, he will call it on one pitch and not on the next.

[wyrm187]

Re: Anyone else really annoyed by strike zone?

I've said this before in another thread, but the only real 'problem' that I have with the zone this year is the inconsistency of the variable zone. It would be cool to learn after a couple innings that the umpire is simply not going to give you that pitch at the bottom of the zone...as it is now, he will call it on one pitch and not on the next.

this is my problem too and it's really driving me insane. Im considering turning variable umpire off. In theory it's really good but I'm hitting on hall of fame currently and when you get called out on a pitch clearly outside of the zone and he hasn't been calling it all game it's really frustrating. I know umps miss calls on both sides, I have really been trying not to strike out as much and I finally got back my eye for the strikezone but the umps are just too erratic for me. No consistency whatsoever