I know it's been covered before, but I can't find the old thread

[SamG]

Thanks. That's what I thought.

Defense complained. BU & PU got together, then called BR out.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by SamG

Thanks. That's what I thought.

Defense complained. BU & PU got together, then called BR out.

[txtrooper]

Speaking ASA, on a walk, if the runner rounds first, commits to second (Umpires Judgement on the 3 steps) and stops, while the pitcher has control of the ball in the circle, its a LBR violation and an out. Although, when the pitcher makes a fake throw, it is considered making a play, no out.

[argodad]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

Speaking ASA, on a walk, if the runner rounds first, commits to second (Umpires Judgement on the 3 steps) and stops, while the pitcher has control of the ball in the circle, its a LBR violation and an out. Although, when the pitcher makes a fake throw, it is considered making a play, no out.

Disagree, Trooper. Runner can round, stop once, then go to 2B or return to 1B. In no case does "committing to second" come into play until after the legal stop.

[txtrooper]

ASA Rule 8, Sec 7, T3 (Look Back Rule) allows the runner to stop in every case? The umpire manual makes reference to and uses the term non-stop within this rule. Our umpire crew and UIC all call it the way I described in the OP. The way you explained it leads me to believe that the runner could run right up to second, stop and then commit to a base (1st or 2nd) without it being a LBR violation?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

ASA Rule 8, Sec 7, T3 (Look Back Rule) allows the runner to stop in every case? The umpire manual makes reference to and uses the term non-stop within this rule. Our umpire crew and UIC all call it the way I described in the OP. The way you explained it leads me to believe that the runner could run right up to second, stop and then commit to a base (1st or 2nd) without it being a LBR violation?

8.7.T.3.a: The batter-runner who rounds first base toward second base may stop once, but then must immediately non-stop return to first base or attempt to adance non-stop to second base.

To me, the rule is quite clear and always has been. The runner is allowed one stop and then must proceed non-stop to one base or the other.

[robbie]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

ASA Rule 8, Sec 7, T3 (Look Back Rule) allows the runner to stop in every case? The umpire manual makes reference to and uses the term non-stop within this rule. Our umpire crew and UIC all call it the way I described in the OP. The way you explained it leads me to believe that the runner could run right up to second, stop and then commit to a base (1st or 2nd) without it being a LBR violation?

Correct.

This is ehe example I often use to illustrate the point of allowing the stop.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

... (Umpires Judgement on the 3 steps) ...

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Yeah, the "three steps" thing had be confused too. I thought that he was implying a runner had to take a certain number of steps toward second to qualify as "an attempt".

But I went back and read the first post and it has a reference to the runner having taken "three steps" past first base.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

Speaking ASA, on a walk, if the runner rounds first, commits to second (Umpires Judgement on the 3 steps) and stops, while the pitcher has control of the ball in the circle, its a LBR violation and an out. Although, when the pitcher makes a fake throw, it is considered making a play, no out.

Are you confusing rounding with overrunning?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

Speaking ASA, on a walk, if the runner rounds first, commits to second (Umpires Judgement on the 3 steps) and stops, while the pitcher has control of the ball in the circle, its a LBR violation and an out. Although, when the pitcher makes a fake throw, it is considered making a play, no out.

Oh no. Find us the rule that says "commits to second" after "three steps". Runner is allowed to continue running in one direction, however far she wants ... stop once, briefly ... decide which way to go, and THEN head to a base (to which she is NOW committed). BR can jog all the way to 1 step short of 2nd base, stop, and return legally.

[SamG]

OK, more details...

As far as player actions, they are as described above. In the interest of full disclosure:
1) My DD was the batter
2) I had helped coach her team for the last 4 weeks, but was "outside the fence" as a spectator b/c I had to look after my other two kids.

Regarding what happened after BR returned to 1st...

D coach stepped away from dugout toward field, I do not remember if he called time or not, but willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He said something to the effect of "She's not allowed to stop and return to 1st".

From outside the fence, I said "She's entitled to one stop as long as she immediately makes a decision." (yes, I should have kept my mouth shut, mea culpa)
D coach looks at me and says "Let us handle it." He might have said something here to the officials, but I don't remember/didn't hear.

PU goes out and meets w/BU out of earshot of anyone. They break up and PU calls BR out.
O coach calls "time" and tries to say pitcher raised her hand as if to make a throw.
PU & BU go back into position, "play ball".
O coach did NOT protest any more.

Obviously I am biased toward my DD & her team. But, I tried to present the case here in an unbiased way. I tried to give as many facts as I can. I will admit my knowledge of the rules isn't the best and didn't know if there are any "extenuating" circumstances that should change the outcome.

From what I can tell here, the umpires made the wrong call. Can O coach "protest" and ask for a ruling from the UIC? Obviously, this shouldn't be a judgement call, right?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by SamG

O coach calls "time" and tries to say pitcher raised her hand as if to make a throw.

Did the coach call time and just start talking, or did he request time, have it granted, and walk out to talk with PU? You're going to get further if you do the 2nd. At this point, OC needs to determine what the PU saw and what they are ruling on.

Can O coach "protest" and ask for a ruling from the UIC? Obviously, this shouldn't be a judgement call, right?

Some of this IS judgement. Which is why OC needs to know what the umpire "saw". If, in his judgement, the movement (if they saw it) by the pitcher was not a play ... then it wasn't. If, in his judgement, BR is out for stopping too long after rounding, then she stopped too long. Neither of these are protestable.

If, however, they tell your coach something contrary to the rules (like - "she can't round first on a walk without going all the way to 2nd"), THEN the coach should definitely protest, and USE THAT WORD.

[SamG]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Did the coach call time and just start talking, or did he request time, have it granted, and walk out to talk with PU?

Honestly, don't know. I think he just started walking out.

You're going to get further if you do the 2nd. At this point, OC needs to determine what the PU saw and what they are ruling on. Some of this IS judgement. Which is why OC needs to know what the umpire "saw". If, in his judgement, the movement (if they saw it) by the pitcher was not a play ... then it wasn't. If, in his judgement, BR is out for stopping too long after rounding, then she stopped too long. Neither of these are protestable.

That makes sense. Is there a proper way to ask what the umpire saw? "Hey Blue, why is she out?" seems simple and too the point, but also sounds argumentative.

If, however, they tell your coach something contrary to the rules (like - "she can't round first on a walk without going all the way to 2nd"), THEN the coach should definitely protest, and USE THAT WORD.

Is there any harm in protesting? Not to extremes, but let's say just once a tournament (like on this play). If a coach protests (I assume that's when UIC is called in) and the umpire's call is upheld, is there any downside? Do umpires "hold it against" a coach for getting the UIC's opinion?

BTW, thanks.

[txtrooper]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Oh no. Find us the rule that says "commits to second" after "three steps". Runner is allowed to continue running in one direction, however far she wants ... stop once, briefly ... decide which way to go, and THEN head to a base (to which she is NOW committed). BR can jog all the way to 1 step short of 2nd base, stop, and return legally.

I never said three steps was a rule or commitment to go second base, review the above post for the origin of the three steps. I said, if in the umpire’s judgment, three steps could be a commitment to second. Just as a runner who rounds first and is tagged, the umpire has to make a call based on their judgment, taking into consideration if an attempt toward second was made.

On the LBR, I am looking at the whole rule under 8.7.T.3.a.b.c.d.e. Neither d nor e requires a stop for the rule to come into effect.

Under a. the rule allows the runner to stop once and immediately make a determination of whether they are going to advance or return to the base.

Where I question the rule is c, d and e all use the term committed to a base. Under a, the author did not use the term committed to second base, although it is implied that a commitment can be made prior to a stop, as in d and e. with all that being said, I believe that it could be cleaned up and explained better. It is apparent that the rule is not called the same at every ball park and I believe that most of us want to make the right calls, although because of the rule there is some confusion among umpires.