Blog Archives
There’s No Good Reason to Squeeze the Strike Zone
Before I start I want to say that this is not your typical rant about how umpires are terrible and shouldn’t be allowed to walk free with the rest of us. To the contrary, I have tremendous respect for umpires because I know it’s a tough and often thankless job, and that nearly all umpires do the best they can to keep each game fair for all involved.
That said, one thing I’ve never understood is why some umpires seem to have a strike zone that is roughly the size and shape of a child’s shoebox. Who do they think it’s benefiting?
According to the USA Softball Rulebook (which is the book all other sanctions are based on) the strike zone runs “from the batter’s arm pits to the top of the knees.” Further, it is “that space over any part of home plate, when a batter assumes a natural batting stance adjacent to home plate.” (Rule 1, Definitions. I looked it up so you don’t have to.)
That’s a pretty big area, really. Note that it doesn’t say the entire ball must be over the plate when it crosses, just that the ball must cross some part of the plate.
So that’s about 18-19 inches wide if you just catch the corners. The vertical area will vary by the height of the batter and her natural stance, but it’s still a lot larger than the 4 inches to either side of the beltline that some seem to demand.
If that’s the case, what reason could there be for shrinking it any smaller than that? Who does it benefit?
Let’s look at all the possibilities.
The Pitcher
That’s a big negatory. You could try to make an argument that the pitcher must learn to spot her pitches better when the strike zone is small.
But the effect that happens in 99.999% of the cases is it forces the pitchers to throw meatballs all game long because that tight little zone sits over the heart of the plate. Pitchers should be learning to pitch the corners – preferably no more than half a ball on – and nip at the very top and bottom of the strike zone.
When she’s forced to throw it down the pipe or have it be called a ball all you’re doing is discouraging a pitcher from growing her craft and creating unnecessary frustration that might discourage her from continuing in the position.
There is already a shortage of pitchers at the older ages. Squeezing the strike zone, especially on younger pitchers who are just beginning to find their way at the position, encourages their abandoning the position.
The Hitter
Sure, you would think forcing pitchers to throw meatballs would be a great thing for hitters. Who wouldn’t love a steady diet of easy-to-hit pitches?
But in many cases it has the opposite effect. Coaches who are more interested in winning a game today than in developing their players will often tell their hitters to keep the bat on their shoulders and wait for the walk instead of swinging.
At least until they get two strikes. Yes, they get lots of extra baserunners that way and might even get some extra runs on walks or wild pitches. But the HITTERS DON’T LEARN TO HIT.
They learn to stand there. At some point they’re going to have to swing the bat, but if they’re not getting reps because umpires are squeezing the zone they’ won’t develop the skills or the mechanics under pressure to execute a successful swing.
Once they’re playing in a game where a more realistic strike zone is being called they’ll be toast.
The Fans/Parents
Nope. Of course, the pitcher’s parents will be apoplectic watching a game with a shoebox-sized strike zone.
A little less if it’s being called the same way on both sides, but still angry that little Maizey is getting screwed over by the person in blue.
But even the hitters’ parents aren’t going to care for it much because it’s BORING. No one wants to watch a walkfest. No one.
The Coaches
Truthfully some coaches will be happy about it. Those are the ones for whom winning is the only important thing.
They’re the ones who are sending their kids to the plate looking for walks.
But any coach who is truly in it for the kids will want their kids to have the opportunity to learn all aspects of the game. That means pitchers learning to give their all instead of trying to hit one tiny spot, hitters swinging at pitches when they’re hittable, balls being put in play so fielders can make plays and learn how to react to different situations, and baserunners can learn how to run the bases.
The Umpires
Finally we get to the folks causing all the commotion. Why any umpire would squeeze the strike zone when it is counter to their own self-interest is beyond me.
Umpires should want to keep the game moving. If it is an untimed game, the more strikes they call the faster the game will go and the sooner they can get off the field and onto whatever they want to do after the game.
But even in a timed gameall they’re going to do is make coaches and parents angry. The last thing they need to do is encourage any more of that.
Not to mention that not calling the strike zone by the rules hurts the players as well as the game. Normally, well-meaning people volunteer to become umpires because they want to serve the game and those who play it.
Whether it’s due to a power trip or just not caring about calling a good and fair game, squeezing the strike zone goes against everything they are supposed to be doing.
At the end of the day there is simply no reason to shrink the strike zone into a belt-high, middle of the plate box. Call it properly and everyone will benefit.
Fastpitch Softball Returning to 2028 Olympics
The fastpitch softball world got some great news this week, as our sport will once again be included in the Olympic Games for 2028. I’m sure it comes as no surprise since the games will be held in Los Angeles and the U.S. is essentially home territory for softball.
Still, nothing is ever a given, so I’m glad to see our sport (as people like to say) will be part of the world’s biggest sports showcase. Hopefully we’ll be able to avoid another worldwide pandemic just prior to the Olympics so there can actually be fans in the stands to see the competition and cheer their teams on.
Of course, with every wish comes a curse. In this case, if past patterns hold, it means beginning this year USA Softball will divert nearly all of its attention to putting a team together to compete at the 2028 games and providing all the logistical support that requires.
The result is the youth levels (with the possible exception of the most elite players) as well as the men’s game (yes, for those of you who don’t know there actually still is men’s fastpitch softball too) will receive scant if any attention for the next five years.
Hope I’m wrong. But I wouldn’t bet against it if I were you.
In any case, as we look forward to watching softball return to the Olympics in 2028, here are a few things I’d like to see.
A new crop of players
Let’s be honest: as exciting as it was to see softball in the 2020 Olympics, it also kind of resembled an Old Timer’s game. Many of the marquee players on the top teams had actually participated the last time softball was in the Olympics.
No disrespect to those long-time players. They were and are tremendous athletes, inspirations, and ambassadors for our sport. I salute them all.
But there are many exciting young players who now deserve an opportunity to wear their countries’ jerseys and fulfill their dreams of competing in the most visible softball games in the world. I look forward to getting to know them throughout the games.
Softball actually be part of the Olympics
While technically softball was part of the 2020 games, the reality is the gold medal had already been awarded by the time all the other participants marched in the parade and lit the torch. It was kind of a slap in the face to our sport, in my opinion.
It was like saying, “Ok you can play, but you have to be done before the REAL Olympics begin.”
This time around I hope to see the games integrated into the two or so weeks that the rest of the events occur. Doing so will maximize the audience by bringing in more casual viewers (most people who watched softball in 2020 were us, the die-hard fanatics) and provide a little more validation of our sport’s place on the world stage.
Announcers who actually understand the sport and its nuances
Much as we love to see fastpitch softball on TV in any capacity, a lack of quality in the announcers covering the game can definitely take away from the enjoyment of the broadcast. At least for those of us who live and breathe the sport.
I’m sure it doesn’t bother the casual observer when, say, a high pitch with bullet spin is called a “riseball” when in fact it is just a high fastball. Or that same bullet spin ends up on the outside corner and it’s called a curve even though it didn’t break even an inch off its normal path.
But those of us who love the sport really would like to see a more accurate appraisal of what is going on.
To that point, I personally would like to see a little more honest analysis of what’s happening on the field instead of the boosterism that normally occurs.
If a knowledgeable expert in the booth thinks a team’s strategy is bad, say so! If an error is made because a player lost focus or made a poor decision, call it out.
That’s what the most popular announcers in all sports do. John Madden never hesitated to call out a boneheaded play (or play call) when he was doing NFL games. Bob Uecker made a career out of telling the (mostly) unvarnished truth during games.
That doesn’t mean announcers need to be hyper critical. But they don’t have to have the Pollyannaish approach we typically hear either.
If announcers call ’em like the see ’em, and make sure to do their homework so they really know what they’re talking about, I think it will be a better, more credible experience for everyone.
The USA change its offensive philosophy
Obviously this one is specific to my favorite team, and the host team, but the offensive approach in the 2020 games was a disaster. Mostly because it seemed to be stuck in the ’80s or ’90s.
It appeared to me that the starting lineup in 2020 was selected for its defensive prowess, as if the people making the selections were expecting a lot of 1-0 or 2-1 games.
Those days are gone. Better equipment, better skills training, better strength and conditioning, rules changes, and more have made today’s game one where you need to put at least a half dozen runs on the board if you plan to win.
That means no more automatically trying to sac bunt a runner to second when the first batter gets on base. IIRC, the U.S.A. team wasted its best hitter by having her bat in the two position and then automatically bunt when the leadoff hitter got on base.
When she finally got a chance to swing the bat she was putting up extra base hits consistently. Imagine if she had done that with a runner on first and no outs!
Having bats in the lineup also gives you a chance to come back if you fall behind. Playing the short game when you’re down three runs in the fifth inning just punches your ticket out faster.
The selection committee needs to invite players who can flat-out hit, and choose a coaching staff that understands how to let them do what they do best instead of trying to fit them into an outdated model.
A little spectacle
Fastpitch softball is a very fan-friendly sport. Much more so than watching athletes run around a track or chuck heavy objects (not that there’s anything wrong with that).
Let’s treat it that way. One of the things that keeps softball out of the Olympics is that some on the Olympic Committee feel it isn’t universal enough, i.e., viewers in non-softball countries won’t tune in to see it.
Give it a little extra pizzazz in the presentation, with some knowledgeable explanation of what’s happening and an eye toward showing non-softball countries how much fun it is to play, and maybe, just maybe, we won’t have to wait another eight or more years to see softball in the Olympics again.
Olympic rings image by Vusi vilanculos, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
A Few Post-Olympic Thoughts
Last week I wrote about some things to watch for as fastpitch softball made its return to the Olympic stage. If you haven’t read it already you may want to follow the link above and give it a look as it is both insightful and brilliant. Or at least marginally interesting.
Now that the tournament is finished I thought it might be a good idea to see what takeaways we might draw from what actually occurred while it was going on. There are definitely some lessons to be learned.
SPOILER ALERT: This post will refer to outcomes, so if you’re one of the few softball fanatics who have not watched the games and are trying to keep yourself from learning who won until you do, you may want to do that first – or explore other posts here on the blog.
Nice to see softball back in the Olympics
Let’s start with the obvious. After a 13 year absence it was great to see fastpitch softball back in the Olympics in any form.
The Olympic games draw a LOT of eyes and are considered to be a major international event. Yes, you have the Pan Am Games and the World Cup of Softball, but those are essentially “in the family” events. IOW, only softball people are interested in them.
The Olympics, on the other hand, allow people who have no real interest in softball to randomly stumble across them. This is also helped by the fact that they appear on a major network (in this case NBC), even though in reality the games were on offshoot networks rather than NBC proper.
Plus the Olympics have built-prestige of their own despite all the problems and scandals of recent years. It’s great for popularizing the sport and exposing it to new potential fans. Lots of good things about it.
That said…
The tournament format was awful
Really? Five pool play games and then you go straight to the Gold and Bronze Medal games?
I would expect more from a local rec league tournament.
Anyone who knows anything about this sport knows a game can turn on a single hit, a bad bounce, a single throwing error, an umpire’s call, etc. At the highest level the margins are even more razor-thin.
Take the U.S. v Australia game. It was won by one fortunate, well-timed hit by the U.S. It could have easily gone the other way.
We also know teams can bounce back from a bad or unfortunate game to come back and take it all.
It should have been a double elimination tournament. I’m sure there were financial reasons it wasn’t, but the format they had made it look like the International Olympic Committee (IOC) just caved to pressure and let it in with the minimal effort possible. Softball was the red-headed stepchild of these Olympics.
This is further evidenced by the fact that half of the pool play occurred BEFORE the opening ceremonies, which most people consider to be the beginning of the Olympics. Which means they were less likely to stumble into the games on TV.
If you wanted to “prove” that not enough people are interested in softball to include it in the future, this was the way to do it.
The U.S. Team’s Offensive Plan Was Poor
If the goal was to prove that softball is an international sport and the U.S. doesn’t dominate it anymore, then mission accomplished. If the goal was to put together a team and a game plan to keep U.S. scoring to the minimum required to get into the Gold Medal game, then well done.
Yes, I realize the pitching is the best in the world (at least in theory), and great pitching beats great hitting. But other teams didn’t seem to have as much trouble scoring runs against each other.
Yet the U.S. managed a measly nine (9) runs in six (count ’em 6) games, and no more than two (2) in any single game. That’s pathetic.
I’m guessing part of that strategy was to support dominating pitchers with the best defense they could, then count on being able to scratch a couple of runs together to win 1-0 or 2-1. So forget worrying about finding big hitters and just get defensive stars.
The problem with that is it’s not 1996 anymore. Softball players work harder these days at hitting overall, and the bat technology is way better than when the Louisville burgundy bottle bat was THE bat to have. You wouldn’t use that in practice now.
A game can turn on a single swing, and if you get behind by a couple of runs early it can be tough to come back if you don’t have players who can hit the gaps for extra bases. As the U.S. found out in the Gold Medal game.
Then there was the offensive philosophy, which was incredibly predictable. As soon as the U.S. got a runner on first, the next hitter up was required to sacrifice bunt. Every. Stinking. Time.
That meant that a hitter like Jamie Reed, who tripled in the first inning of the Gold Medal game against the worlds best pitcher, spent most of the tournament laying down bunts instead of trying to drive runs in.
Even a fly ball to the fence could have advanced the runner on first as effectively as a bunt, with the added benefit that it might hit the fence or go over, resulting in a better offensive position.
I haven’t seen the stats, but to the best of my recollection the number of runs that were manufactured by sacrifice bunts was zero. In the meantime, the U.S. gave up a whole bunch of outs that might have come in handy later in the game.
Yes, I am prejudiced against the sac bunt anyway, and have been for a long time. It’s a waste in most cases. This just proved the point.
The other downside of being so predictable was that opposing teams, Japan in particular, could just sit on it and use it to their advantage. Like by pulling the corners in and pulling off a double play against a sac bunt.
Keep in mind the U.S. win against Japan in pool play came off a home run. They needed more of that.
Especially since, according to the announcers, Japan has spent the last few years trying to put MORE offensive firepower into their game. If Japan is your Gold Standard (no pun intended) the U.S. may want to look for players who can bang the ball – and then let them do it.
The defense was unreal
In my last post I talked about watching the speed of the game. These games did not disappoint.
The defense across the board was incredible. So many great plays by so many players on all teams. That is an aspect everyone got right.
The whole thing looked like an old timer’s game
Perhaps the oddest thing about these Olympics were how old many of the players were. Especially in the circle.
Monica and Cat for the U.S. are both mid- to late-30s. Yukiko Ueno is 39. Team Canada had several recognizable names from the past. All of them played in the last Olympic games.
It’s almost as if the people in charge felt they owed it to these players to let them play in one more Olympics. Not that they didn’t perform – they did.
But in a sports culture obsessed with youth it’s hard to believe there weren’t younger players who could have done just as well. Have we done such a poor job of training the next generation that the last generation had to step in? Or were they just trying to go with glory names from the past?
The problem with that is you lose the younger audience who didn’t grow up watching Cat and Monica and the others dominate the sport. I think a lot of younger fans want to see the names they’ve been watching in the Women’s College World Series – players they know and can relate to.
In my very informal survey of my students, most did not watch the Olympics. They had little interest. If you can’t get current players to watch the game played at that level how are you going to grow softball as a spectator sport?
From a marketing standpoint it’s time to leave the past behind and start focusing on the future. We apparently have eight years to get it right. Let’s do it.
It was essentially an American tournament
For those who still complain about U.S. dominance of the sport, they do have a point. Despite the different names on the jerseys, many of the players – especially for Italy, Canada and Mexico – were either U.S. citizens or played college ball in the U.S.
I think that was less true for Australia, but I believe they had a few too.
About the only team that wasn’t made in America essentially was Team Japan.
It’s great that more deserving players get an opportunity to play in the Olympics by going with teams representing their heritage instead of where they were born and/or raised. But if softball is going to become a permanent part of the Olympics we need more locally raised players for these teams.
Especially the European teams, because their Olympic Committees hold a lot of sway over how the Olympics are run.
Hopefully softball can generate enough publicity to get girls in these countries interested in playing softball at a high level against each other as well as against U.S. players. I guess we’ll see.
So there you have it – a few of my observations. Now it’s your turn.
Did you watch? If so, what did you think? Leave your observations in the comments below.
A Tale of Persistence
First of all, congratulations to the Crush Tidal Waves (CTW) 18U JS team for taking it all in the recent USA Softball (formerly ASA for you old die-hards) Chicago Metro. The Metro is always a tough tournament with strong teams, so winning it is definitely an accomplishment.
But it’s the way they won it this year that makes this story worth sharing, in my opinion. And since Life in the Fastpitch Lane is my blog, I get all the votes. No pretense here.
Basically, the CTW did it the hard way. First, it was a very hot and humid weekend in the Chicago area. Temperatures were in the mid-90s for most of it, and with the sun beating down it felt even hotter. I know, because I was outside for much of it.
CTW started out with two wins in pool play on Friday before beginning bracket play Saturday. They won their first game, then fell 5-2 in their second game of the day. That put them in the loser’s bracket in the double-elimination tournament, with a long way to go to get back to the championship game.
Still, they persisted. The challenge now was to win 7 games in a row – two more on Saturday in the brutal heat, then three on Sunday to get into the championship game. After that, they’d have to face a team that hadn’t lost in bracket play and was well-rested as they waited for all the other teams to beat each other up. And, of course, they had to win twice.
The first of those two games was a real nail-biter, with CTW leaving it all on the field to gain a 3-2 victory. You would think they’d have felt pretty good by then, having taken the top team to the what-if game after all that. No one would have blamed them if they had come out a little flat for the final match-up.
But again, they persisted, and instead they came out strong and took the final game (and the trophy) 5-1. Not sure where they found the reserves of strength after all of that, but they did.
Battered but not broken, exhausted but elated, and probably ready to jump head first into the nearest swimming pool, the CTW 18U JS team came out victorious.
So it does go to show that if you’re determined enough, and persistent enough, and just not willing to lose you can come back to win a big tournament like that.
Congratulations to the players, coaches, parents and fans. But mostly to the players and coaches for never giving up.
(A special shout-out goes to Katie Armstrong, a long-time player for CTW and one of my 
pitching and hitting students. Savvy readers may recognize Katie from my vlog on hitting off a pitching machine, among other mentions. Katie did all this with a hip injury that will require surgery after the season, which has limited her pitching time this year. But I think you’ll agree she thought it was worth it.)
I imagine for a lot of the players this season is the end of their travel ball careers, and for those who aren’t playing in college it’s the end of their entire softball careers. But what a memory they gained!
It’s also the kind of story they can tell future employers who say “Tell me about a time when you faced incredible difficulties but managed to succeed.”
Life in the Fastpitch Lane 