Look Back Rule

[Elaine "Lady Blue"]

Just look for a way to get an out. If the opportunity is not there, play ball.
Sorry fellows, but discussing the 'look back' rule is like beating a dead horse to me.

[Andy]

Elaine.....I noticed that you seem to be posting more often since you mastered the smilies!!!!

[WestMichBlue]

"Sorry fellows, but discussing the 'look back' rule is like beating a dead horse to me."

I thought it was a legitimate question; asked because I will be covering this subject in local association classes this winter. I respect the opinions expressed here and it insures that I am teaching correctly.

The L-B rule in not in effect until the pitcher has the ball, thus any stops or other motions prior to that point should not be L-B violations. However, I know that many umpires consider the initial stop, when traveling away from a base, to be the runner's legal stop. I wanted to hear which way this board went. A couple would call the runner out in the scenario I presented, but most agreed to follow the rule literally. So I have my answer. Sorry if achieving it bothered you.

WayTom

[WestMichBlue]

DTTB: "The purpose of the rule, as I understand it, is to prevent the offense from attracting, creating, or tempting the defense into making a play so that the offense can possibly advance a runner after the play is basically over."

Can't agree, Tony. What will you do with the runner that starts to steal 2B and stops, forcing F4 to run after her while R1 on 3B tries to steal home?

I have always felt that the L-B rule was written to eliminate a form of taunting and game delaying. I'm talking about the game playing between a runner of the base and the catcher or pitcher with the ball. The defender fakes, the runner moves a step. The defender gets closer to the runner, the runner gets closer to the bag. Finally the defender runs all the way to the bag and the runner finally steps on the bag. Then finally, we set up for the next pitch - and get to do it all over again!

The L-B rule took all that out of the game. Just return the ball to the pitcher, and the runner has to do something. It does not prevent the runner from advancing a base; it doesn't penalize a legitimate runner. It just takes away the game playing and moves the game faster.

WMB

[whiskers_ump]

Did someone delete a post between the two WMB post
or am I missing something? .

glen

Maybe it was pollywolly60? I got a notice he responded.

[Edited by whiskers_ump on Oct 3rd, 2003 at 03:04 PM]

[greymule]

I think the questions posed were entirely legitimate. The differences of opinion and interpretation suggest that there's considerable confusion as to what exactly to call.

I do believe the rule was instituted to prevent runners from "playing games" with the defense. Still, the spirit of the rule takes you only so far. I think the best policy is to follow the book (ignoring certain exceptions: for example, if the runner returns to 1B with the ball in the circle, and then in turning her foot to get ready to run upon the release, she moves it an inch off the base for half a second, that's not a violation).

Not only do stops before the ball is in the circle not count as stops, they also have no bearing on anything that happens after the ball gets into the circle. Nothing that the runner does before the ball gets into the circle affects the look-back rule at all. See the ball in the circle first, then look at the runners.

[Dakota]

I agree with WMB and greymule here, DTTB. I've always believed the rule was there to prevent delay. While it does not really stop the F2 - runner stuff, it does put a stop to it once F1 has the ball - the runner has to either attempt to advance or give up immediately.

As to the original situation, I would not call that runner out for the reasons already stated.

Regarding the statement in POE33 on runners moving toward a base etc., I was just looking to spark some conversation about that sentence and how everyone applies/ignores it, since it does seem contradictory.

WMB, I'd be interested in how you plan to address this in your class.

[pollywolly60]

papa smurf:

I replied after Elaine's post, and then deleted my reply because I didn't like the way it read. It wasn't really a reply to anyone's post, it was just a question. I just went to my rule book and read some more. I think I'm clear on my question now. The statement that caused my question was the runner going non-stop from first to second on a walk, and then stopping two steps from second (after the pitcher has the ball) and returning to first. My original reaction was "out!", but that would not allow for a stop for the runner. However, I feel that the runner had already committed to second. I originally thought that would never happen, but then my husband (also a blue) mentioned that scenario to try and get a third base runner home. So I think I still have an out. I think.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by pollywolly60
So I think I still have an out. I think.

No, not an out. The runner gets her one stop.

[WestMichBlue]

"WMB, I'd be interested in how you plan to address this in your class."

Ignore it! (Just as I do - as you well know - with another POE!

Actually, it is a NFHS clinic; our association trains and schedules umpires for 50+ area high school's BB and SB games. As we do have some crossover, I will note areas where ASA and NFHS agree and/or disagree, but the primary focus is on NFHS rules.

As far as the POE statement, I've always felt that it was directed at a runner on her initial move towards a new base. Say R1 on 3B and R2 stealing 2B. The ball is returned to F1 and R2 stops short of second and decides to return to 1B in order to draw a throw. According to the POE she would be called out, but the rule does not support that interpretation.

To make this even more absurd, suppose a pitch gets away from F2, and R1 on 2B takes off for 3B. F2 pounces on the loose ball and flips it back to F1. R1 hits 3B fast and takes one or two steps toward home (as F1 receives the ball), then puts on the brakes and dives back into 3B. Are you going to call her out because she did not continue to home? I don't think so.

Until we get a better explanation of that particular sentence in the POE, I think that we have to igore it.

WMB

[JEL]

Well, Maybe the horse aint dead yet.

8-7-T-3a, may seem contradictory with POE statement;
If a runner is moving towards a base, other than first base, when the pitcher recieves the ball in the circle, that runner must continue toward the base, or be called out.
As I interpret the scenario of running almost to second after a walk and then retreating back to first, I would have to call an out. It seems the "spirit" of the rule would have been violated is this case. The POE I feel gives the right to take second, but once committed, the runner can not return. A stop after rounding first by a step or two is not the same as a stop two steps from second.

I am the other half (actually 3/4 or more) of PollyWolly (above), and we have been beating this horse at home too! need more games to call! Actually, I have seen a retreat such as this, and it was done to draw a throw/start a run-down to allow runner from third to score. As I understand the LBR, this should not be allowed.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
DTTB: "The purpose of the rule, as I understand it, is to prevent the offense from attracting, creating, or tempting the defense into making a play so that the offense can possibly advance a runner after the play is basically over."

Can't agree, Tony. What will you do with the runner that starts to steal 2B and stops, forcing F4 to run after her while R1 on 3B tries to steal home?

WMB

I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that F4 has the ball? If F4 has the ball and is chasing the runner, then obviously a play is being made and the Look-Back-Rule is not applicable. Play continues and the runner from 3rd can advance.

My point, and maybe I didn't say it well, was this rule is to prevent the offense from initiating a play after everything is done/stopped. The BR that passes first and then stops to face off with a pitcher that has the ball in the circle is, in my opinion, attempting to attract a play. They are taunting the pitcher. The runner cannot stay here (off the base). And any actions by the runner to now attract a play is illegal as follows: the runner must IMMEDIATELY decide which direction to go and then MUST CONTINUE in that direction to the base or until the defense makes a play. Once the defense makes a play the runner can change directions or do whatever is necessary to avoid being tagged out. But the runner cannot make moves in one direction and then stop to see what the pitcher does; cannot move in halting motions; cannot take a hard step in one direction and then run in the other; cannot move and stop. These type of actions are illegal and a dead ball should be called, stopping movement of all runners, and the taunting runner called out.

I think we both agree on this, but I'm not sure.

In my opinion, the runner that passes their base and tries to attract a play by the defense has basically said "I am a sacrafice so that my teammate can score. Make a play on me." But they cannot try to establish themselves in a hot-box using the style of actions I stated above (attempting to extend the play) if the defense is not willing to make a play. Run directly to 2nd, stop and run directly back to 1st, these are OKAY. But you cannot taunt the defense if they are not making a play. That is the illegal action.

I hope I have said this better and that you agree WMB.

Tony,

[whiskers_ump]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JEL
[B]Well, Maybe the horse aint dead yet.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JEL
Well, Maybe the horse aint dead yet.



I am the other half (actually 3/4 or more) of PollyWolly (above),
Wooooow, PollyWolly, JEL kinda left you in the cold...

funning, glen

[JEL]

Papasmurff, I had a BIG sister, Had to get little wife!

Trust me, she can hold her own!