[Steve M]

David said - "Basically the argument came down to this:

1. The defense acknowledged that the BR was free to advance despite the ball being in the circle, however, the other runner had to either advance or return to third or be subject to being called out for a "Lookback Rule" violation.

2. The offense claimed that if one runner was free to advance then all runners were free to advance. Had the BR stopped at 1st and the other runner remained off the bag, then she could have been called out for a violation. But the BR never stopped! That kept the play live. The pitcher cannot use the "Lookback Rule" to freeze runners as long as one runner is legally continuing her advance. Theoretically, the BR could have run completely around the bases and scored while the pitcher looked on with the ball in the circle. If that is so then, obviously, the runner at 3rd would be free to advance as well.

The umpires consulted with one another and decided not to call out any runners and claimed there was no "Lookback Rule" violation.

The defense protested the ruling claiming that the rule had been misapplied.

The defense ultimately won the game and withdrew the protest."

The defense' position is correct. Every individual runner is subject to it - as individuals, not as a team. Your play sure sounds like a mia-applied rule. If explained to those hearing the protest, it would have been upheld.


The offense knows they got away with one. They sold some bad dope with their argument that The pitcher cannot use the "Lookback Rule" to freeze runners as long as one runner is legally continuing her advance. The pitcher does not freeze the runner(s), the rule deals with them. It sounds like those umps bought the bad dope - and smoked it.