Look back rule
 

For the look back rule, what constitutes a play by the pitcher in the circle? Some umpires will say that a fake throw is a play. Recently I'm hearing that if the pitcher simply walks in the direction of a runner that is a play. Can anyone provide clarity on this?

Thank you!

ASA Rule 8.7.T.
EXCEPTION: The runner will not be declared out if
1. A play is made on any runner. A fake throw is considered a play, [snip]

The way it has been explained is that *ANY* gesture by F1 that could cause a runner to react is enough to take off LBR.

So would you say if F1 is walking toward 2B in the circle as R2 just walked and proceeds to 2nd with R1 on 3B. The arm never comes up. Would the walk and look be considered a gesture?

At the ASA National school a few years ago in Ann Arbor...we were instructed that anything that can/will get a reaction from the runner is a play.

Sounds like yours might be a HTBT.

Taking you literally, the answer is no.
F1 simply "walking" from one part of the circle to another is not necessarily considered a "gesture" that would constitute a "play".

But a slight shake of the head, would.

Very interesting. And yes she literally walked to the back of the circle and I thought for sure the runner on 3rd would be called out on the LBR the explanation was that she was walking and •could• have the momentum to throw it underhand to get the runner going to second. Seems to me too much judgement on this, they should try to tighten this up. His suggestion to me was to check with the umpires before the game what they view as a play to negate the lbr.

"Reasonable Man" theory should prevail. Would any reasonable person have considered the possibility a play was being attempted? Should a reasonable runner have reacted to what the pitcher was doing?

If yes, then that is an attempted play. If not, should have been a LBR violation.

Doesn't sound like F1 made a play but as has been stated you have to see it. It is judgement and not sure it needs to be "tightened up".

But not sure why you would have an LBR out here anyway.. R1 is on 3B so she is fine, while the batter-runner who just walked, opted to continue past 1B to 2B. Even if F1s walk to the back of the circle is NOT considered making a play, so far nothing has happened which would trigger an LBR out.

If the ball is in the possession of the pitcher in the circle, once R2 reached first base the LBR is in effect.

To the OP, checking to see how they would enforce the LBR will probably get you an answer along the lines of "as described in the book," which will put you no further along than you were before you asked.

Wow! Talk about strawman arguments ;) Coach = reasonable?:D

J/K

The problem is that the LBR has become a strategy and a nit-picking point with coaches demanding umpires see it the same way they do and that never leads to any solution that all would deem reasonable. Of course, that also depends on which side of the inning their team is playing at the time. :D

Of one of my favorites, "Coach, when and if I see the a violation, I will call it."

That's the best part!! It doesn't matter what the coach thinks, I get to decide what is reasonable!!

I love the rules that refer to "in the umpire's judgment"; still haven't found one that says "in the coach's judgment", or "if the coach agrees"!!

Not tightened up, maybe loosened up. It is easy if you remember the intent is not to be a gotcha or cheap out rule; just to prevent runners disrupting/delaying the game by repeated maneuvers between bases.

Several years ago, I was doing a USSSA World Series in Missouri....it was about 104 degrees with typical STL humidity.

A coach from Minnesota came out to discuss what his SS thought had been a violation. He was dripping sweat.

Before he could say anything, I said:

Coach, does it get this hot in Minnesota?
He said. Not that I can remember.
I responded: Do you think there is any way I would not have called an OUT if I could?
He smiled and said: That is good enough for me.

Twelve hours to post the anticipated dig at the look back rule....you must be slowing down in your old age......:D

Well, Andy, all we, (and I know you see them too, hence "we") seem to hear is how every umpire has their own interpretation and the coaches don't know what to expect and this and that.........

Don't quite remember anyone saying, "boy, Blue was all over that LBR violation". I still don't think it is hard to understand. Those who enjoy the benefits of proper training usually get it right. It is when those who aren't as lucky as some, or choose to ignore their training, decide how it should be instead of how it is seems to be the only time anyone mentions the damn thing.

It is a control instrument, not a damn strategy. We all know a better way to control the game and foolishness, but no one wants to be the first to take that step.

LBR?
BR runs pass first base and turns inside, and with out stopping, walks back down the line to first base and just prior to touching first base and without hesitation takes off for second. The pitcher had control of the ball in the circle prior to the BR intially touching first base and made no attempt on runner BR, would you consider this a LBR violation?

Depends on the rule set.

NCAA, no. Most others, yes.

Absolutely. (ASA)

heck, i even had the girl touch first and head for second. guess because they had female coaches that played college ball, they could try that play. may be not ok or ok (don't know) for college.

Anyways, she was called out for lbr

Sorry for not being active on this after I started it... darn work gets in the way.

So the runner on third was off 3rd (about 6' down the line), and then the ball was in the circle and after the girl who walked went past 1B, I thought a no-brainer call on the LBR since she did not go to third nor to home. This is when he told me that walking toward second was considered a play.

What I meant by saying "tightened up". If this is now the case that walking in the circle could be considered a play. Too much judgement here. And yes, given this definition, coaches will start using this as a strategy to get that runner on 3rd home.

I guess the best thing is to tell the pitcher to catch the ball and stop and not look around.

Interesting. This exact play happened this past weekend in a PONY tournament, thought for sure it was LBR, but said it was a legal play. And it was my baserunner who did it :eek:

It should be legal in all books, IMO. There is little justification for treating the overrunning BR differently from any other runner WRT the LBR. Just give her the one stop like everyone else has.

I have always thought the opposite, that the NCAA version I believe created by TW at U of W gives the offense an unfair advantage.

The difference with every other base is that runners at those bases that overrun ARE in jeopardy, and MUST immediately decide to advance or return.

It seems to me that allowing the overrun without any jeopardy already gives the offense an advantage. So, while protected, they still get to avoid making (and demonstrating) a decision if they are advancing or simply returning? Seems to me to be two bites out of the apple. You can/should get one or the other, not another free shot while without jeopardy.

JMO.

They got their one stop when they turned and committed to 1B.

Seems overrunning then changing directions IS the equivalent of a stop.

(Yeah - justlike Irishmafia said a few minutes ago!!)
;-)

The rule does not distinguish whether F1 has the ball in the circle. So, if the ball is not back in the circle yet when the BR turns, that is not her "stop". But, as the rule is written, she is now committed to 1B anyway.

Of course it does. The "rule" is not in effect, thereby not applicable unless F1 has possession of the ball in the circle.

We had this discussion some time ago, last year, or before.

I was making the point that if the BR overruns and makes her turn back toward 1B before the ball is in the circle, that the "committed to first" does not apply, and she still has her one stop.

I was very lonely in making that case. IIRC, you and everyone else said that didn't matter. Once she headed back to 1B, and the ball was in the circle (regardless of the order of those two) she was committed.

What you are saying now is if she turns back to 1B before the ball is in the circle, she can go to within a step of 1B, and legally take off for 2B?

NCAA
12.21.6.5 The batter-runner, after overrunning first base, must immediately
return nonstop to first base or, if she does not retouch first base, must
make an attempt to advance to second. If after passing the base, the base
runner is heading back toward first base within the basepath extended, she
may make a decision to go to either base. However, stepping beyond the
extended basepath in foul territory commits the base runner to first base
while stepping beyond the basepath toward the second-base side commits
the base runner to second base.

Perhaps you aren't realizing that no one here is talking about the NCAA version of the rule. The discussion at this point is about everyone OTHER than NCAA.

Tom, I hear what you are saying, and submit that one basic premise of the LBR is that runners always have a "decision moment", which can vary according to the play. Most often, that moment is the one stop we discuss. In cases where a stopped runner sees the ball into the circle, we say that the runner gets to pick up the ball, recognize where it is, who has it, and that it is in control, and then must immediately make a decision.

I don't see the overrun differently. Once the runner turns back, if the ball is in the circle, the runner sees it (or should see it), the decision moment is now; if she doesn't break for 2nd NOW, she is committed to 1st (EXCEPT in NCAA; already said why I don't like that). If she is simply being a runner who is not subject to LBR because the ball isn't in the circle, she still has a decision to make based on the protection provided by overrunning the base; to make an attempt puts her in jeopardy, to return to the base (and accept THAT protection) means she is committing to first; under the overrun rule.

But, if the runner returning to first breaks for second before or simultaneous with F1 gaining control in the circle, I don't have a LBR violation, I have a runner that decided to attempt to advance legally, and is now in jeopardy. If she breaks AFTER F1 gains control, then I say she has taken both bites (ala NCAA), and have a LBR violation everywhere else.

Unless you have something different, yeah. (assuming the ball isn't in the circle)

I see what you are saying. Still, I think it is an unnecessary special case. See next post.

Trying to narrow down your view.

ASA Rules

Situation 1:
BR on a wild pitch ball four advances to 1B. BR overruns 1B. F2 throws to F3. BR turns back toward 1B and is apparently returning to 1B. F3 throws the ball to F1. BR continues a couple of steps toward 1B (no pause or stop), then breaks for 2B. LBR violation.

Situation 2:
BR on a wild pitch ball four advances to 1B. BR rounds 1B. F2 throws to F4. BR turns back toward 1B and is apparently returning to 1B. F4 throws the ball to F1. BR continues a couple of steps toward 1B (no pause or stop), then breaks for 2B. No LBR violation.

Why are these different?

1. BR/R not in jeopardy
2. R in jeopardy

Again (and this is for Andy), another reason to dump the rule and avoid the CS on the bases. Play the game, not the rules.

Irish and steve, this is the type of languague we need to get at clinIcs and on paper somewhere. As typing like chicken, I will stop here.

Thanks ron

If you are in his state in ASA, or even his Region, you can here Irish talk at all the clinics you want.

While I have filled in as a clinician in my area, and even as a clinician at an ASA National School, I have no official position within ASA.

Out of the last 4 tears, clinic in region got canceLed twice.I will make sure to bring up some of the plays so mike and others can provide thinking onthese plays.

So iexpect mike to have all these plays ready to roll on the video screen

They are talking Morgantown, WV next year and unless something serious changes, I will not be there.

Crap! I'd be almost worth the drive to sit up front with a smirk on my face watching Mike teach the Look Back Rule! :D

Yes, of course. But in the OP it was stated that R1 was on 3B not off it. So she is fine. And the BR who just walked does not stop on 1B but continues on so she is fine. No LBR, at least not yet.

If R1 takes off from 3B after BR passes 1B without anything from F1 that the umpire judges to be "a play or an attempted play" then you have an LBR.

Before reading Mike's response, I have nothing on both of these.