LBR question

[JefferMC]

This came up in another discussion forum. After looking at the various rule books and concluding the following, I wanted to run this past you.

Situation:

BR beats throw to 1B and has headed a decent distance past, turns and is walking back towards 1B. F3 returns the ball to F1 in the circle, F1, F3 and F4 all turn their back on the runner getting ready for the next play. BR (now R1, I suppose) breaks for 2B before reaching 1B.

Question: Is this legal...

in NFHS?
in NCAA?
in ASA?

My interpretation is now No, Yes, No. What do y'all say?

[DaveASA/FED]

Dont' know about NCAA but I agree NO in ASA and FED

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED

Dont' know about NCAA but I agree NO in ASA and FED

When, exactly did:

1) The LBR go into effect, and
2) The runner commit to 1B

(and back these up with a rule)

[DaveASA/FED]

Rule is the LBR and the interpteration of when the LBR goes into effect was given by someone I trust that it doesn't matter (before BR touches first, or before they return to first) once F1 has ball in circle LBR applies all sections

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED

Rule is the LBR and the interpteration of when the LBR goes into effect was given by someone I trust that it doesn't matter (before BR touches first, or before they return to first) once F1 has ball in circle LBR applies all sections

IOW, this interpretation applies the restrictions of the LBR retroactively to a BR who overruns 1B, rendering this statement in rule 8-7 moot:

T. (Fast Pitch) LOOK BACK RULE.
The “Look Back” rule will be in effect for all runners when the ball is live, the batter-runner has touched first base or has been declared out, and the pitcher has possession and control of the ball within the pitcher’s circle.

I've heard the interpretation you stated before. In fact, if memory serves, Mike (Irish) has stated the same. My problem is that that is not what the rule book actually says. In addition, IMO, the LBR for the BR is unnecessarily complicated.

The defense is responsible for getting the ball back to the circle and for paying attention to the runners.

[JefferMC]

Dakota,

The (ASA) rule book actually says this (in 2007 at least).

8.7.T.3

d. A batter-runner who over-runs first base toward right field, turns left and moves back toward the infield in any direction except directly toward second base is committed to first base and must return non-stop to first base

e. A batter-runner who over-runs first base toward right field, and turns right, is committed to first base and must return non-stop to first base.

I read the NFHS book to be identical. However, the NCAA is quite a bit different.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

Dakota,

The (ASA) rule book actually says this (in 2007 at least).



I read the NFHS book to be identical. However, the NCAA is quite a bit different.

Yes, but all of that is when the LBR is in effect. If the LBR is not in effect, the rest of the LBR details are moot.

[JefferMC]

Originally Posted by 2007 ASA Rules

The “Look Back” rule will be in effect for all runners when the ball is live, the
batter-runner has touched first base or has been declared out, and the pitcher has possession and control of the ball within the pitcher’s circle.

As far as I can tell, these conditions have been met. So what am I missing?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

As far as I can tell, these conditions have been met. So what am I missing?

Those conditions were NOT met (specifically F1 having the ball in the circle) at the time the runner overran 1B and made her turn. They were only in effect once the runner was moving back toward 1B. So, to place the restriction on the runner, you have to apply the rule retroactively, since the base committed to depends on which way and how the runner turns after overrunning 1B. Without applying the rule retroactively, you merely have a runner moving toward a base, and she is allowed one stop and then must immediately decide which base to go to.

[JefferMC]

I don't understand why you think that the BR has to be touching first while F1 has the ball in the circle for LBR to apply. The rule lists several conditions that must be met and doesn't state an order or that they must occur simultaneously.

In fact, I have a hard time reconciling why they would put 8.7.T.3.d-e in the book if the conditions you describe must be met.

I would have been squarely in your camp until I re-read the rule book and found these little ornery statements.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

I don't understand why you think that the BR has to be touching first while F1 has the ball in the circle for LBR to apply. The rule lists several conditions that must be met and doesn't state an order or that they must occur simultaneously.

In fact, I have a hard time reconciling why they would put 8.7.T.3.d-e in the book if the conditions you describe must be met.

I would have been squarely in your camp until I re-read the rule book and found these little ornery statements.

"has touched" or really "has reached" <> "be touching"

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

I don't understand why you think that the BR has to be touching first while F1 has the ball in the circle for LBR to apply. The rule lists several conditions that must be met and doesn't state an order or that they must occur simultaneously.

In fact, I have a hard time reconciling why they would put 8.7.T.3.d-e in the book if the conditions you describe must be met.

I would have been squarely in your camp until I re-read the rule book and found these little ornery statements.

I didn't say anything remotely like that. I said F1 has to have the ball in the circle for the LBR to apply, and that whatever happened BEFORE F1 had the ball in the circle is moot for the LBR.

BR overruns 1B, turns (whichever way, I don't care) and heads back to 1B, or angles toward 2B, whatever you want.

AFTER the BR has made her turn and while she is moving toward one base or the other, THEN F1 receives the ball back in the circle.

NOW you want to enforce the LBR based on which way the BR turned BEFORE the rule went into effect?

Really?

What if she heads back to 1B, then moves toward 2B, then heads back toward 1B, and then angles toward 2B again and THEN F1 gets the ball back. Which base, pray tell, is she now committed to under the LBR?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I didn't say anything remotely like that. I said F1 has to have the ball in the circle for the LBR to apply, and that whatever happened BEFORE F1 had the ball in the circle is moot for the LBR.

BR overruns 1B, turns (whichever way, I don't care) and heads back to 1B, or angles toward 2B, whatever you want.

AFTER the BR has made her turn and while she is moving toward one base or the other, THEN F1 receives the ball back in the circle.

NOW you want to enforce the LBR based on which way the BR turned BEFORE the rule went into effect?

Really?

What if she heads back to 1B, then moves toward 2B, then heads back toward 1B, and then angles toward 2B again and THEN F1 gets the ball back. Which base, pray tell, is she now committed to under the LBR?

Well, #1, she has placed herself in jeopardy, IMO, but the umpire should consider the direction of the runner at the time the pitcher receives and possesses the ball in the circle as it pertains to the base to which she is committed.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Well, #1, she has placed herself in jeopardy, IMO, but the umpire should consider the direction of the runner at the time the pitcher receives and possesses the ball in the circle as it pertains to the base to which she is committed.

Bingo!

RS 34 Paragraph G mentions Umpires judgement determines what committing to one base or another is on an overrun at first base.

I think I need more info on the OP to make a call on that one. Might be one of those had to see it moments.

[Dakota]

Bingo, bango, bongo, and all due respect to Mike, that is not what the rule book says. It says the rule is not in force when the runner is overrunning, turning, zigging and zagging.

The rule is too complex, besides. It offers no real advantage to the defense over the standard rule for runners.

My point in all of this is the rule is obtuse, contradictory, and should be clarified, or even better, scrapped.