Foul Ball!

Jason Michael Barker

Major League Baseball and pseudo-commish Bud Selig are at it once again -- alienating the very people it needs to help the game run smoothly.

No, I'm not talking about the fans, although that would have been a good guess. I'm referring to the Men in Blue, MLB's umpires, who have been taken out of the loop when it comes to decisions relating to the job.

Umpires don't get very much positive press. Usually when you read about umpiring, it's a story about how bad a call so-and-so made last night to cost the Yankees a game, or how they're overweight and senile.

The first issue is that of the strike zone. Most umpires don't call strikes on any pitch above the waist, even though the rules state that the strike zone extends from the top of the knees to an imaginary line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the pants. Still, this hasn't been too much of a problem since the calls are fairly consistent (I suspect if you asked players what they want in an umpire in terms of the strike zone, the number one answer would be "consistency").

Last month Sandy Alderson, executive vice president of baseball operations in the commissioner's office (that's a fancy title for "Bud Selig's errand boy"), issued a memo to umpires instructing them to call the strike zone two inches above the top of the uniform pants. This is where the confusion began, both on and off the field.

First, baseball has now asked the umpires to call a smaller strike zone than is stated in the official rules. Regardless of how the zone had been called recently, this is a clear violation of an umpire's contract, which requires him to enforce the rules of baseball as they are written.

Second, any official rule change requires a two-thirds majority vote by the rules committee. Such a vote never happened, nor were the umpires consulted on the rule change, as is required in the umpires' labor agreement.

Finally, hitters and pitchers alike have been surprised by a wide range of strike zone interpretation this spring. This probably isn't much to worry about, however -- it seems that every spring umpires vow to call the strike zone as it's written (and enforce rules meant to speed up the game, and...), but by the middle of May the zone is right back where it used to be.

Such blatant circumventing of the rules seems more than a reasonable excuse for umpires to protest games or stage some sort of labor stoppage, either long-term or simply a one-game statement. As a baseball fan, I find that unacceptable. I don't know if you remember the last time we had replacement umpires, but it wasn't much fun to watch.

One more point regarding balls and strikes -- it seems to me that there's been too much made over the high strike, or lack thereof. No, umpires don't call it the way it's written. But they are consistent about it, to the point that both hitters and pitchers generally know what to expect.

What has been overlooked, by comparison, is the variance in strike zone width. This is an issue on which there should be little, if no, interpretation -- the plate is 17 inches wide, and that's all there is to it. Perhaps someone needs to remind Eric Gregg (among others) of this number, as he regularly operates as if the plate were closer to two full feet in width.

The other bone of contention between the umpires and baseball is Cuba. Not the country specifically, but a series of exhibition games to be played between the Baltimore Orioles and the Cuban National Team. The Orioles will travel to Havana on March 28; the Cubans will visit Camden Yards on May 3. Originally, the umpiring crews for both games were to be made up of American League and Cuban umpires.

American League umpires were not consulted about their participation, and in grievances filed this week, they protested the trip in addition to the strike zone issue.

For their part, baseball decided the games could go on without the AL umpires, who have been told they will be staying home. Seeing as these are exhibition games that fall on days the umpires would normally have off, this is more than a reasonable decision.

Still, the umpires should have been consulted. Perhaps there are a few men in blue who would have enjoyed the trip to Cuba, and the chance to work with umpires from another country. Instead, they were signed up against their will, then cast aside upon raising objections. Is this the way to make your employees feel appreciated? Certainly not.

These two quarrels are representative of the growing rift between Major League Baseball and the umpires, who can't seem to communicate on even the most basic of issues, let alone important aspects of the game such as what is a ball and what is a strike. Both sides are in part to blame, for instead of sitting down trying to work things out, they're content to take shots at one another in the media.

The umpires' labor agreement expires following the 1999 season, and it's clear the two parties have a great deal to work out. The negotiations may not be as drawn out as the labor strife of 1994 or carry the long-term consequences, but they will almost certainly be as bitter.

about the author

Jason Michael Barker once had dreams of becoming a Major League Baseball umpire, but those dreams died when he saw Lesley Nielsen in The Naked Gun. Assure Jason that he could have danced like that if called upon to do so when you email him at jmb@strikethree.com.