Poor OC

[rwest]

Originally Posted by robbie

I only do NSA rules. I assume the above is an accurate quote of ASA or Fed or some other rule set. If so, LBR criteria are met. However..............

In NSA, it does not even meet the first requirement:
"Look Back Rule: When a runner is legitimately off a base........."
The BR (Now R2) was not off base.

No LBR

...that the BR broke for second after stopping at 1st. When the runner stopped at 1st all of the elements for LBR where in place. When she headed toward 2nd she was in violation of the LBR. Once you stop at a base you can not leave it for any reason when the pitcher has the ball in the circle unless the pitcher makes a play on a runner.

[greymule]

Somewhere in the umpire manual or the case book or the rules supplement is an admonition that the LBR is not in effect when F1 in the circle acts as a cutoff. The governing principle might be as follows: "With a play in progress, the LBR does not necessarily go into effect the instant F1 gets the ball in the circle. Depending on the type of play, use your judgment to give the runners a little time to make the transition from ball in play to ball in the circle."

The OP is a HTBT, but unfortunately, the call was apparently correct. I think that the LBR has outlived whatever usefulness it had, especially at the higher levels.

[SRW]

I tend to agree with Mike on this one. 8.7.T shouldn't be used as a "gotcha" in the middle of playing action to get an out. If runners were still advancing legitimately, playing action hasn't really ceased, and the F1 hasn't really gone from being a fielder to being the pitcher.

In this situation, what was called in the OP was a case of "rulebook right, ballfield wrong," IMHO.

However, now that dead ball was (incorrectly?) called, you can't advance the runner coming home, so putting her back on 3B was the right thing to do.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Okay, I thought y'all be smart enough to pick up and talk about my point, but apparently I need to explain it.

My point is when does the pitcher stop becoming a fielder and return to the status of a pitcher?

Based on what I am reading in the replies, the pitcher is always a pitcher and never a fielder. Do you enforce the LBR immediately if a pitcher catches a ball in flight in the circle? If so, you have removed a runner's right to tag up and advance on a caught fly ball. Of if running on the pitch and has reached the next base, the ability to attempt to return to the base they need to tag to avoid being put out.

This was discussed two years ago at the UIC Clinic with Walt Sparks and, at least in my group, the consensus seemed to be that the LBR isn't in effect until, in the judgment of the umpire, the effects of the ball being put into play are completed.

Think about it from a runner's point of view. A throw from the outfield is cut off by SOMEONE in the middle of the infield. Do you really expect the runners and coaches to be able to immediately identify this player as the one who pitched the ball and adjust their running assignments accordingly?

As previously stated, I don't believe this was the purpose of the LBR. Whether I like the rule or not is irrelevant to the discussion.

If ASA actually wants that to be the official interpretation (in red), they should be a lot more clear about when the pitcher stops being a fielder. Is she still a fielder if she is exhibiting defensive indifference to a runner, as apparently was the case in the OP? Here is what the RS says:

34. LOOK-BACK RULE (Fast Pitch) (Rule 8 Section 7 T).
E. A pitcher fielding a ball in the circle is an infielder and runners can leave their base. If runners leave their base, the same rule applies while the pitcher holds the ball in the circle: once the runner stops, they must decide which way to continue or be called out.

In the OP, I can see giving the pitcher and the runners time for the pitcher to transition from fielder to pitcher. That is the HTBT part of the OP. But, that is not the same thing as waiting until "the effects of the ball being put into play are completed." If that were the case, then R1 could just stand off 3B while F1 has the ball in the circle while the BR continues on to 2B.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by SRW

I tend to agree with Mike on this one. 8.7.T shouldn't be used as a "gotcha" in the middle of playing action to get an out. If runners were still advancing legitimately, playing action hasn't really ceased, and the F1 hasn't really gone from being a fielder to being the pitcher.

In this situation, what was called in the OP was a case of "rulebook right, ballfield wrong," IMHO.

However, now that dead ball was (incorrectly?) called, you can't advance the runner coming home, so putting her back on 3B was the right thing to do.

"Playing action" isn't a part of the LBR definition. Now maybe it should be and personally I would support the change. However, the rulebook is clear that once you have stopped at a base and the pitcher has the ball in the circle, you can not leave said base unless the pitcher makes a play. Some coaches understand the look back rule and will not throw in this situation knowing that the runner on 1st can advance. If they believe they don't have a good chance at getting the lead runner out, they will just hold the ball. Similar to the play where R1 on 3rd gets a lead off on the release of the pitch as the BR walks to first. Once the BR touches 1st base the LBR is in effect if the pitcher has the ball in the circle. Often times the BR will continue on to 2nd. Many coaches teach their pitcher to not make a play. The lead runner at 3rd better be heading back to 3rd at this point. And most teams teach the player to do just that. Are you going to allow the lead runner to stand off of the base until the BR gets to 2nd? I'm not. I don't see that the OP is much different than this play.

[vcblue]

Originally Posted by Dakota

If ASA actually wants that to be the official interpretation (in red), they should be a lot more clear about when the pitcher stops being a fielder. Is she still a fielder if she is exhibiting defensive indifference to a runner, as apparently was the case in the OP? Here is what the RS says:In the OP, I can see giving the pitcher and the runners time for the pitcher to transition from fielder to pitcher. That is the HTBT part of the OP. But, that is not the same thing as waiting until "the effects of the ball being put into play are completed." If that were the case, then R1 could just stand off 3B while F1 has the ball in the circle while the BR continues on to 2B.

Fielding the ball is a lot different from the ball being returned to the pitcher. I think in this case you can only go by if the pitcher attempted to make or feint a play per book rule. By no means am I saying, "oh, she received the ball, oh she left the base, deadball"! But, in this case the pitcher has the ball, she was not attempting a play, the OC yells go..go...go and the runner goes.

Personally, I think she had a play at home, but this was 12U rec, the pitcher has been watching or playing softball at least since she was 4. The catcher was not that good, and maybe she wanted to stop the runner from advancing to second.

[vcblue]

Originally Posted by SRW

In this situation, what was called in the OP was a case of "rulebook right, ballfield wrong," IMHO.

Last year at The So-cal 18gold regional the UIC said something to me that makes since. "You can never be wrong for making a call supported by the book".

In no way did I make a quick call on this. I never do, but at some point you have to make the call and then be ready to explain your ruling.

IMHO it would have been easy to turn a blind eye to this play, but then I may have been the cause of one team winning over the other. Instead it was the coach.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by vcblue

..."You can never be wrong for making a call supported by the book"....

hmmmm.... whatchasayboutdis, wade?

[greymule]

BTW in sub-sets of a rule typically rule numbering 1...2...3... does not mean#1 needs to be met, it means 1, 2, or 3... need to be met. They are all equal

Depends whether they are joined by "and" or "or."

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Dakota

hmmmm.... whatchasayboutdis, wade?

Ha!

The WORST calls are sometimes supported by the rule book

[vcblue]

The bottom line here is I need to get fired from my 8 to 5 job so I can collect unemployment and start my own business. Then I can stop only working rec. and travel, and start working higher level ball.

Mickey Mouse and I are not friends.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Okay, that's more like it.

Yes, I do believe the LBR is no longer a necessity. Instead of providing control of the runners to keep the game moving (OMG, a speed up rule!), it has become a tool for a defensive strategy. The rule and it's application has gotten out of control.

I agree with Tom that there should be a more definitive demarcation of when a player is a pitcher or fielder.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Yes, I do believe the LBR is no longer a necessity.

Well, I don't know you could make the case it was ever a necessity, but it is very helpful at younger ages, because otherwise the same silly stuff that now goes on between catchers and runners would just move to between pitchers and runners. OC's would dare pitchers to try to pick off the runner, betting that the runners will be able to advance many more times than they are tagged out.

I do think that at the upper levels, the rule is largely superfluous.

Do you keep a rule that mainly helps at the lower levels of the game? I say "yes", but I would be very open to modifications as suggested: the LBR does not go into effect until the ongoing play from a batted ball is over.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Well, I don't know you could make the case it was ever a necessity, but it is very helpful at younger ages, because otherwise the same silly stuff that now goes on between catchers and runners would just move to between pitchers and runners. OC's would dare pitchers to try to pick off the runner, betting that the runners will be able to advance many more times than they are tagged out.

I do think that at the upper levels, the rule is largely superfluous.

Do you keep a rule that mainly helps at the lower levels of the game? I say "yes", but I would be very open to modifications as suggested: the LBR does not go into effect until the ongoing play from a batted ball is over.

I think it would be more to control the coaches who still think the rules they played in the sand lot 20 years before still apply

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I think it would be more to control the coaches who still think the rules they played in the sand lot 20 years before still apply

Or worse... those who use Tim McCarver as their coaching expert!