Why should umps have different strike zones?

I'm watching the Giants/Phillies game and already one of my big pet peeves in baseball has reared its ugly head.

Dan Iassogna, the home plate umpire, called ball four on Jimmy Rollins to drive in the lone run of the game so far. It looked knee high down the center of the plate.

An inning late, he called a pitch lower than the one thrown to Rollins a called third strike on Fontenot to end the second.

The boys on KNBR were talking about how Iassogna does not have a good reputation for calling balls and strikes.

Couple this with the Hunter Wendelstedt fiasco against the Twins and the general acceptance that certain umpires call high strikes but not low strikes... some call a ball off the plate... some squeeze pitchers... some don't...

Um, isn't that crazy?

Let's go to the Official Rules...
The Strike Zone is, and I quote:

...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.

Pretty cut and dry, isn't it?

And yet people just accept that the umpire will call it how they please.

You don't see this in other aspects of the game.
You don't hear "He calls the ball foul if it just falls one foot fair... that's just how he calls it."
Or "If you slide somewhere near home plate, that's good enough... that's how he calls it."

No. The rest of the game it is in black and white.

Now I am sure there will be many of the opponents of instant replay who will write in and say that one of the joys of baseball is seeing umpires take control of the game and decide what a strike zone is.

I ask "Why should a pitcher get squeezed and be forced to throw pitches down the heart of the plate?"

How about an answer to the question "Why should a pitch be a strike in one inning and a ball to another?"

And "Why should a 3 time batting champ get a favorable call? Isn't it hard enough to get a 3 time batting champ out without the ump bending the rules in his favor?"

I am going to make a video on this topic, but I would LOVE to hear a logical reason why the umpire shouldn't call a strike a strike and a ball a ball.

Nice to see Bob Davidson act out the end of "...And Justice For All."

It's not often that you can see a grown man lose his God Damn Mind.

But once again, in a night where we should be celebrating baseball, an umpire's ego takes center stage.

Bob Davidson tossed out a player, Brewers outfielder Chris Dickerson.

He tossed out a coach, Cardinals pitching coach Dave Duncan.

He tossed out Brewers manager Ken Macha.

And finally he tossed out a fan who was sitting up close and heckling Yadier Molina.

Now I don't know what he said and if the fan said anything racist, then I can understand it. But so far nobody has revealed if there was anything really offensive.

And besides, the umpire doesn't have the authority to eject a fan unless they interfere with the field of play. And this was a guy sitting up close. I can't imagine the guys sitting up in the upper deck of MILLER Park watching a team called the BREWERS and have been drinking beer since 11 AM were quoting sonnets.

But Bob Davidson basically went nuts. And we are talking about HIM instead of Trevor Hoffman's 600th save.

No doubt he would have tossed Billy the Brewers, all four Sausages from the Sausage Race and Bob Uecker before the night was out.

I can just hear him screaming "You're out of order... You're out of order... this WHOLE game is out of order!"

(Spoiler alert on this clip... it kind of spoils the ending but explains the blog post title.)

Was it REALLY necessary to end a game like that?

A thrilling game was played today with post season implications in Minnesota.
The Rangers and the Twins are both fighting for home field advantage in the Division Series (which might be huge in trying to upset either the Yankees or the Rays in the first round.)

The Twins were going for the sweep... the Rangers were rallying in the 9th.
It is everything that you want in a meaningful September Labor Day weekend baseball game.

So what are people going to talk about?

The fact that Michael Young's hand briefly touched third base coach Dave Anderson's hand as he rounded third as the potential tying run.

Interference. Third Out. End of Game.

Really?
I mean I know that technically the brushing of hands isn't allowed, but shouldn't there be the equivalent of the swallowing of a whistle at this point in a game? In a big game in the 9th inning with 2 outs... shouldn't the ump come over to Anderson after the play and say "Watch out. You touched him as he rounded the bases. Next time I'll call that"?

Did the brushing of hands REALLY help Michael Young or affect the play in any way shape or form. It's not like he was Forrest Gump picking up Bubba and Lt. Dan from the Vietnam gunfire. Their hands brushed in a wild and nutty 9th inning.

Seriously, Alfonso Marquez, was it REALLY necessary to END a game like this... the last meeting of these two in the regular season, on a ticky tack call?

Now I know I am going to get people writing in saying "A rule is a rule and it needs to be enforced at all times."

I remember when I got on Bob Davidson for ejecting John Lackey in 2009 for what I thought was a ticky tack and garbled reason, I got people writing saying that rules need to be enforced no matter what the situation is.

Why?
Seriously... why?
In other sports you see the refs let the players play the game. You try not to have games decided on a cheap hand check or a cheap penalty to cause an overtime powerplay.

If Texas finish a game behind the Twins at the end of their regular season, I am sure it will be a great comfort to Rangers fans to know they are starting the playoffs on the road because Michael Young's hand briefly touched Dave Anderson's.