Lookback clarification
 

A batter-runner who overruns first base and turns to the left toward second is she commited to go to second before she stops or after the stop? The rulebook says "and stops" which means to me that both are required. So if she overruns first base and heads toward second but then changes direction back to first without stopping we have nothing. She's not commited unless she stops. Agree or disagree?

A B-R that overruns 1B and turns left and stops - must then committ to either 2B or return to 1B - non-stop.

A B-R that overruns 1B and turns left and moves towards 2B and stops - is committed to continue to 2B.

A B-R that overruns 1B and turns left and turns back towards the infield (any direction except towards 2B) is committed to return to 1B.

Simply, a B-R that has overrun 1B and turned left has 3 options:
Stop - and choice of 2B or 1B.
Move towards 2B, committed to 2B
Move towards infield, committed to 1B.

Otherwise be called out for LBR violation.

WM

Assuming, of course, the LBR is in effect.

Another Look Back question:

Runner rounds first base as pitcher gets ball in the circle (ie: LBR is in effect).

Runner stops momentarily off first, then immediately proceeds to second base (all legal, so far).

As the runner reaches second, she rounds it. Upon rounding second, she stops momentarily then immediately returns to second base.

Is the runner out for having made a second stop?

The rule governing her first stop (between first and second) says that she is out if she does not immediately return to first or advance toward second. The runner met that obligation.

Her second stop, after rounding second base, would not violate the spirit and intent of the rule. It would not be done as a jockeying cat and mouse game, but as a normal rounding of the bag and quick return.

As the LBR is written, the second stop or reversal seems only to apply when in between two bases. Once the advanced base is legally obtained, is there any sort of "reset" (for lack of a better word) to the runners Look Back obligations?

Is there any interpretation to cover the play I described, or is it simply "two stops, you're out"? I can see a logic and common sense to allowing that second stop after the advanced base has been reached.

"I can see a logic and common sense to allowing that second stop after the advanced base has been reached."

"Her second stop, after rounding second base, would not violate the spirit and intent of the rule. "

The rule refers to being off "a base"; which would be the base most recently achieved (legally).
Same as before, the LBR is not there as a "gotcha" for umpires, just to control runners excesses.

This exact situation was presented to me over the weekend, by a coach attending an umpire clinic for a local rec league. He said that it happened last summer on the travel ball team he coaches.

His runner was the one that made the stop after rounding second and was called out for "stopping twice". He said that he subsequently spoke with another umpire about this play and was told that the ruling was incorrect.

Allowing that second stop after the next base is reached makes sense to me. (I know that the LBR isn't there to provide cheap outs for the umpires.)

Reading the rule straight from the book might allow one to infer this to be the case, but the rule isn't explicit about what is allowed after that next base is reached. That's why I was wondering if anyone had an official interpretation, case play, etc. to cover this.

The rule states that after one stop, the runner must proceed to the next base or return to the previous base. Seems the runner met that criteria. Rule also states that if the runner stops in contact with the base while the LBR is in effect, the runner is ruled out. Seems the runner didn't do that.

I would think that barring any follow-up information to the contrary, what the runner did is permissible.