The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 02:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3
look back rule

Look Back rule.

Batter get base on ball. Runner runs around 1st toward 2nd. A ball is returned to pitcher. A runner kinda slow down then proceed to 2nd. Is runner out due to look back rule violation? Since the runner is commited to 2nd base?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 02:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: north central Pa
Posts: 2,360
Did this runner stop - and stay stopped? Did this runner change direction twice? What part of the lookback rule do you think the runner violated? I do not see a violation in the description you gave.
__________________
Steve M
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 03:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by gfleischer82
Look Back rule.

Batter get base on ball. Runner runs around 1st toward 2nd. A ball is returned to pitcher. A runner kinda slow down then proceed to 2nd. Is runner out due to look back rule violation? Since the runner is commited to 2nd base?
There is no such thing as a runner being committed to a base. Not even sure what you'd be referring to there.

Once the pitcher has the ball in the circle AND the BR has reached first base, LBR is on. AFTER this moment, the runner is allowed to stop exactly once, decide which way to go, and then must continue in that direction, assuming no play is made. Let's assume that BR has reached first in your scenario. The runner slowing - legal. Did she stop? If so, legal for now. Did she stop for longer than a couple of seconds? If so - there's your LBR violation. If not, did she then, after the stop, proceed in only one direction (either toward 1st or 2nd). If so, legal. If she stopped a 2nd time, or reversed direction after the first stop, then you have a LBR violation.

Your sitch sounds completely legal, even if BR had reached first.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 03:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by gfleischer82
Look Back rule.

Batter get base on ball. Runner runs around 1st toward 2nd. A ball is returned to pitcher. A runner kinda slow down then proceed to 2nd. Is runner out due to look back rule violation? Since the runner is commited to 2nd base?
To start, I hope the defense appeal the BR failing to touch 1B

The runner is not committed to 2B, did not stop, did not reverse direction.

There is no call to be made here.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 04:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrowder
There is no such thing as a runner being committed to a base. Not even sure what you'd be referring to there.
NFHS 8-7-4
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 06:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3
ASA:

a runner did not stopped or changed directions.

just like running fast slow down then run fast (changing speed) toward 2nd base after base on ball

Last edited by gfleischer82; Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 06:04pm.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 07:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
To start, I hope the defense appeal the BR failing to touch 1B

The runner is not committed to 2B, did not stop, did not reverse direction.

There is no call to be made here.
I believe the poster did not mean missed 1B, though it's worded awkwardly.

Bob
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 07:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by gfleischer82
Look Back rule.

Batter get base on ball. Runner runs around 1st toward 2nd. A ball is returned to pitcher. A runner kinda slow down then proceed to 2nd. Is runner out due to look back rule violation? Since the runner is commited to 2nd base?
As others said, a runner is not "committed" to a base. Only managers and coaches should be "committed", but not to a base.

Since the runner did not stop, the "look-back" rule is not in effect. She/he could walk as slowly as she/he wants, as long as moving.

Bob
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 08:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sierra Nevada Mtns
Posts: 3,220
What age group was this? 12U friendly rec?

Its such a common thing to do.

Lucky for yall she didnt run all the way home.
__________________
ASA, NCAA, NFHS
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 11:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3
14U friendly.

She did touched first base. Then to 2nd base.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 25, 2006, 09:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluezebra
Only managers and coaches should be "committed", but not to a base.
I don't know about that. There are a few that I think should be committed to a base.......in Irag or Afghanistan.

Just kidding!
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 25, 2006, 09:20am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne
NFHS 8-7-4
Which says what?

The runner may be required, based on certain actions, to continue in a certain direction, but she certainly is not "committed" to a specific base. The runner in the OP could have continued all the way home if she wanted.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 25, 2006, 10:51am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrowder
The runner may be required, based on certain actions, to continue in a certain direction, but she certainly is not "committed" to a specific base. The runner in the OP could have continued all the way home if she wanted.
OK, you keep bringing this back up. ASA 8-7-T uses the term "committed" in reference to a base in 3-c, d, and e.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 25, 2006, 04:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrowder
Which says what?

The runner may be required, based on certain actions, to continue in a certain direction, but she certainly is not "committed" to a specific base. The runner in the OP could have continued all the way home if she wanted.
Come on Mike, the word "committed" is used in that rule.
Now you made me look it up:
in c: "is committed to second"
in d: "is committed to first"
in e: "is committed to first"
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 26, 2006, 01:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Fair enough - my bad!

I now think, instead, that the rule is worded poorly. They are not really committed to a base - technically they are committed to either run forward or run backward without stopping. Nothing says (especially in the forward cases) that they can't continue running. I guess I'm saying that the word "committed" here is misleading.

But yeah - I'm wrong as to whether that word appears on the rule. My apologies.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Look-Back Rule justmom Softball 2 Sun Apr 30, 2006 07:22am
Look Back Rule BuggBob Softball 7 Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:32am
Look Back Rule ??? 3afan Softball 2 Sun Apr 04, 2004 12:03am
FED - New look-back rule SamNVa Softball 6 Tue Mar 19, 2002 10:20pm
New look back rule (ASA) Dakota Softball 6 Fri Dec 07, 2001 12:00am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:37pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1