not allowed to frame.....huh?

[crystlemc]

PGF umpires didn't just sprout up like weeds. They also ump other sanctions. If you have a problem with a PGF ump, chances are you would have had problems with him at an ASA, NSA, or USSSA event.

 

[BretMan2]

I can tell you for certain that Larry's daughter doesn't "pull" and does an excellent job of framing, so I don't think he was looking at pulling at all. I have seen her catch many times over the years.

Well, in that case, telling her to stop was even dumber!

 

[Centerville_FP]

My daughter catches in college and has had various umps tell her both that her framing was good and to stop framing. Luckily she is smart enough to know that the ump runs the game and she does or stops doing what it takes to get strikes for her pitcher instead of losing them and her dad is smart enough to not tell her to ignore the umpire and do what her daddy says....

 

[Centerville_FP]

Well, in that case, telling her to stop was even dumber!

Amen!!!!!!!

 

[SMc4SMc]

Agreeing with Centerville_FP ...Playing the game is about discipline, strategy, and adjustments (to name a few)... Umpires are part of the "game"...play 'em too.

 

[TR_Out]

Big difference betweem "framing" and "pulling" pitches. I suspect that the umpire was addressing the latter. While it might be counterproductive to "pull" pitches, it's not illegal. No rule addresses that.

"Framing" a pitch means receiving the pitch with the least glove movement and for the umpire to get the best possible view of it. All good catchers frame pitches.

"Pulling" a pitch is when the catcher recieves the ball out of the strike zone, or borderline out of the zone, then after catching it pulls her glove back into the strike zone. Generally, umpires hate this...but it's still not illegal. Just dumb.

When a catcher pulls a pitch, it tells me that she didn't think it was a strike to begin with. If it was a strike, then why the need to jerk the glove back into the strike zone? Some catchers seem to think that they can fool the umpire like that, but all it really does is increase the chance that the pitch will be called a ball.

There is still no LOVE button on OFC; if there were, I would have hit it like 900 times! I get a kick out of listening to the defense's parents belly-ache at an ump calling a ball when the catcher "pulled" the ball 6-8 inches. Ummm, Parents, the catcher knew it was a ball and the umpire called it a ball. My goodness.

 

[FastBat]

Big difference between "framing" and "pulling" pitches. I suspect that the umpire was addressing the latter. While it might be counterproductive to "pull" pitches, it's not illegal. No rule addresses that.

"Framing" a pitch means receiving the pitch with the least glove movement and for the umpire to get the best possible view of it. All good catchers frame pitches.

"Pulling" a pitch is when the catcher receives the ball out of the strike zone, or borderline out of the zone, then after catching it pulls her glove back into the strike zone.


Generally, umpires hate this...but it's still not illegal. Just dumb.

When a catcher pulls a pitch, it tells me that she didn't think it was a strike to begin with. If it was a strike, then why the need to jerk the glove back into the strike zone? Some catchers seem to think that they can fool the umpire like that, but all it really does is increase the chance that the pitch will be called a ball.

Shouldn't the softball be called a ball or strike when it crosses the plate, not when in catcher's glove? What's the difference what the catcher does? Obviously, the catcher/ump relationship needs to be mutually respectful, but I think the ump needs to understand the relationship between the catcher and teammates, and the catcher is just trying do the best she can. I've never really thought to hard about this though.

 

[BretMan2]

Shouldn't the softball be called a ball or strike when it crosses the plate, not when in catchers glove? What's the difference what the catcher does? Obviously, the catcher/ump relationship needs mutually respectful, but I think the ump needs to understand the relationship between the catcher and teammates, and the catcher just trying do the best she can. I've never thought about this.

Yes, the pitch is either a ball or strike depending on where it crosses the plate.

So who exactly does a catcher think they're fooling when they catch the ball off the plate, then jerk their glove back toward the plate?

While the strike zone is over the plate, how the catcher receives the pitch can influence an umpire's call. You can say this shouldn't be all you want, but as a practical matter of reality it is true.

Notice that I didn't say where or how the ball is caught determines if it it is a strike. I said that it might influence the call, not that it is the end-all and be-all deciding factor. The reality is that an umpire is trying to track a moving object through an imaginary box floating in 3-D space, defined by some points that don't even touch the box. In other words, he needs to consider any piece of evidence he can to judge the path of the ball.

Where the ball ends up- in the catcher's mitt- provides a good fixed point to use as a frame of reference. Where the ball hits the mitt doesn't necessarily define exactly where it crossed the plate, but it does help the umpire to extrapolate where it did. Even pitches with a lot of movement aren't going to move a significant amount in the small distance between the plate and the catcher.

The softball strike zone is fairly huge and it's easy to tell when a pitch is in the center area of it. The pitches that cause controversy are the ones on the fringes. These are the toughest pitches to call. If the catcher is catching the ball in those fringe areas, near the edge of the plate, then jerking her glove back toward the center, she's selling the idea that the ball must have been off the plate.

Not only does this sell the notion that the pitch was a ball, but since the catcher usually jerks the glove the instant the ball hits it, it takes away that key piece of evidence used to line up the ball's path. The umpire doesn't even get a chance to gauge where the ball hit the mitt because the mitt gets moved so fast.

Good, experienced catchers know that how they receive the pitch can influence the call and good, experienced umpires know that where the ball hits the mitt provides a key reference point to judge where the ball crossed the plate.

Now, if the pitch crosses the plate and is clearly in the strike zone, it doesn't matter what the catcher does after that. Call the pitch a strike. If it clearly misses the strike zone, call it a ball no matter what the catcher does. But on borderline pitches, if the catcher is constantly jerking the mitt she's probably going to cost her pitcher a few strikes in that game.

 

[Ri-domination]

Ive got no problem it especially at a young age, it just shows me the girl is trying to put some work in and do what she can for her team.

 

[tygerblood]

I heard an umpire call a ball and when the coach asked where was that his reply was..it barely caught the corner..I thought to myself..what a douchebag..some off these umpires can really make you scratch your head sometimes Lmbo

 

[hot corner]

Yes, the pitch is either a ball or strike depending on where it crosses the plate.

So who exactly does a catcher think they're fooling when they catch the ball off the plate, then jerk their glove back toward the plate?

While the strike zone is over the plate, how the catcher receives the pitch can influence an umpire's call. You can say this shouldn't be all you want, but as a practical matter of reality it is true.

Notice that I didn't say where or how the ball is caught determines if it it is a strike. I said that it might influence the call, not that it is the end-all and be-all deciding factor. The reality is that an umpire is trying to track a moving object through an imaginary box floating in 3-D space, defined by some points that don't even touch the box. In other words, he needs to consider any piece of evidence he can to judge the path of the ball.

Where the ball ends up- in the catcher's mitt- provides a good fixed point to use as a frame of reference. Where the ball hits the mitt doesn't necessarily define exactly where it crossed the plate, but it does help the umpire to extrapolate where it did. Even pitches with a lot of movement aren't going to move a significant amount in the small distance between the plate and the catcher.

The softball strike zone is fairly huge and it's easy to tell when a pitch is in the center area of it. The pitches that cause controversy are the ones on the fringes. These are the toughest pitches to call. If the catcher is catching the ball in those fringe areas, near the edge of the plate, then jerking her glove back toward the center, she's selling the idea that the ball must have been off the plate.

Not only does this sell the notion that the pitch was a ball, but since the catcher usually jerks the glove the instant the ball hits it, it takes away that key piece of evidence used to line up the ball's path. The umpire doesn't even get a chance to gauge where the ball hit the mitt because the mitt gets moved so fast.

Good, experienced catchers know that how they receive the pitch can influence the call and good, experienced umpires know that where the ball hits the mitt provides a key reference point to judge where the ball crossed the plate.

Now, if the pitch crosses the plate and is clearly in the strike zone, it doesn't matter what the catcher does after that. Call the pitch a strike. If it clearly misses the strike zone, call it a ball no matter what the catcher does. But on borderline pitches, if the catcher is constantly jerking the mitt she's probably going to cost her pitcher a few strikes in that game.

Wow, you seriouly made this comment that is very scarry. What about the curve on the outside of the plate or the screwball on the inside plate the drop ball that comes in at the front of the plate thigh high and dropes , the change up that come in dropes. Where the catcher catches the ball from the front of the plates is about 3 to 5 feet the ball can move quite a bit depending where it crosses and how high or low the ball is. The real problem is the ump using where the catcher cathes the ball to determine if it is a strike or ball.

 

[17smom]

When my DD that was told that by the ump, she was truly framing and receiving the pitch the way she's been taught...getting around the ball. She was not pulling the pitch at all and is taught not to do that. It is one of our pet peeves when seeing or hearing another catcher talk about "fooling umps" by pulling pitches. That's not the intent of framing at all! So when the ump suggested that she was trying to fool him by receiving/framing the pitch properly we were a little perplexed...but haven't come across it since

 

[BretMan2]

Wow, you seriouly made this comment that is very scarry. What about the curve on the outside of the plate or the screwball on the inside plate the drop ball that comes in at the front of the plate thigh high and dropes , the change up that come in dropes. Where the catcher catches the ball from the front of the plates is about 3 to 5 feet the ball can move quite a bit depending where it crosses and how high or low the ball is. The real problem is the ump using where the catcher cathes the ball to determine if it is a strike or ball.

Well, sorry if I scared anybody...

I thought that I made it clear that where the ball is caught isn't THE determining factor of ball or strike. It is one single piece of the collective evidence that an umpire might use in tracking a pitch. And I did note that if the pitch was obviously a ball or strike that it doesn't really matter what the catcher does.

 

[FastBat]

Well, sorry if I scared anybody...

I thought that I made it clear that where the ball is caught isn't THE determining factor of ball or strike. It is one single piece of the collective evidence that an umpire might use in tracking a pitch. And I did note that if the pitch was obviously a ball or strike that it doesn't really matter what the catcher does.

Ok, that does make sense!

 

[hot corner]

Well, sorry if I scared anybody...

I thought that I made it clear that where the ball is caught isn't THE determining factor of ball or strike. It is one single piece of the collective evidence that an umpire might use in tracking a pitch. And I did note that if the pitch was obviously a ball or strike that it doesn't really matter what the catcher does.

My point is that depending where the ball comes in at and how high or low the ball is it can move quite abit. ex. the change up that come in cross the front of the batter hip high and the catcher has to drop to her knees to catch the ball is a strike. But if you use it as a factor then most likely you are going to call it a ball.

That being, said the real problem is the umps that don't use it as a "factor" but will call balls or strikes depending on where the catcher catches the ball. They are ones a lot times say something to the catcher for frammimg.

 

[larrybowman]

When the pitch is out if the zone my dd won't "pull" the pitch.... Just because she doesn't want to tick off the ump. She was just doing her normal tramping, which is why I kind of laughed it off.

 

[WalkOffHR]

My DD is an 18U catcher and said an ump told her if she keeps showing him up by holding pitches he is going to start calling strikes balls. She said "you mean you are going to KEEP calling strikes balls?"

 

[larrybowman]

Haha....i like that walkoffHR

 

[BretMan2]

Framing is a legitimate technique for receiving pitches. Pulling pitches is something different that's not a good technique. But altogether different than either of those is when the umpire calls the pitch a ball and the catcher just holds her mitt in one spot for an extended period after the call.

This is openly disagreeing with the call. What other reason do you have for holding the pitch like that? I've never threatened a catcher not to do that, but if they keep doing it over and over, I might say something like, "Let's go. Throw it back".

The worst one I had was a few years ago. The catcher was catching the ball well off the plate, then pulling her glove back right to the center of the plate, then holding it there for an extended time after I called it a ball. It wasn't fooling me, but apparently it was fooling her own coach!

He came out to me and wanted to know why I wasn't calling strikes on those pitches that were "right down the middle of the plate". Let's just say that we had a few words about his catcher...

 

[classicpride]

If the umpire is noticing that you are framing then you are doing a poor job of it! A catcher that is framing effectively will do so without the umpire noticing what she is doing. Positioning your body to receive the ball and then pushing it into the strike zone should all be done fluidly in one motion as part of receiving the pitch.