Comments on: Paying to Bring Us the Playoffs

By: mark

mark — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:45:49 +0000

Very good points JC. I never thought of the strike zone and the mobility issues. I think your logic is correct, but a part of me still misses seeing the external protector if only because of the historic value. Traditions change. I still miss that bullpen car that was shaped like a baseball that used to deliver the relief pitcher to the pitcher’s mound at old Met Stadium. I’m sure I could think of 20 other traditions that have gone by the way side.
Thanks alot JC for your input. Umpiring is not an easy job. When I’m at Spring Training games I watch the umpires as much as I watch the players.

By: Jim Crikket

Jim Crikket — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 23:12:07 +0000

Now I have a future as a reviewer? I wish at some point I’d have a future as something that actually makes some money! I just don’t think being a reviewer is going to allow me to retire with the standard of living I’d like. Ah well, I do appreciate the kind words, mark.

I used to umpire a bit at the JuCo / high school / middle school age levels. I actually started doing that right out of HS myself and therefore used the external protector. Eventually, we all moved to internal protectors.

From my experience, there were two big advantages to the internal protectors.

First, you are a lot more mobile. As the plate umpire, you don’t just stand behind home plate for 3 hours. Depending on what’s going on in the field, you may need to run out some where to cover another base (this is particularly true at levels that just use two umpires) or get in to position to make sure you can see if a runner is tagging up, etc. Running around with an external protector was awkward, at best.

More importantly, however, is that you can get a much better look at the strike zone. “Back in the day,” umpires were taught to set eye level at the top of the hitter’s strike zone. With an outside protector, that’s about as low as you could get anyway. But with an inside protector, an umpire can get right down over the catcher’s inside shoulder. By the way, the inside protector is also probably the biggest reason that the strike zone eventually became “knee to belt buckle” instead of extending up to the letters.

The downside of the internal protector, as we saw, is that occasionally you catch a foul ball off the arm/wrist/hand.

By: mark

mark — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:11:48 +0000

This is the funniest post I have ever read on this site. I think you have a future as a reviewer.

You also wrote- “Ouch. That shot on the bicep taken by plate umpire Mike Everett had to hurt.”

I like umpires I really do. But I really enjoy seeing an umpire take a foul ball to their arm. That would never happen if they still used the external chest protector. As an old time traditionalist I think the game changed when umpires went to the internal protector. My all-time favorite is when its 98 degrees and the umpire has sweat dripping and then he takes a solid foul ball to the arm.
Hey JC. Why did they switch to the internal protector? I have never heard a good answer.