During a rain delay today, this sitch came up from some softball umpires.

R2 only, count doesn't matter. F1 delivers pitch. R2 takes lead on release, and then begins stroling toward 3rd slowly. F2 returns ball to F1. F1 either forgets about R2 or ignores her, and R2 keeps moving toward 3rd without a stop. F1 steps on pitchers plate and delivers a "pitch" to batter who has remained in batters box in a ready position while R2 is between 2nd and 3rd.

What do we have????

I first proposed "no pitch". Then was asked what do we do with the runner, and what do you do if the battter hits the second pitch? I didn't have an answer.

The umpire that offered the sitch stated he had received an interp from someone at USSSA that the runner was out for being off base before second pitch was released.(I'm not sure who offered the interp, or if it was official.) None of us liked that, as there is no rule requiring a runner to advance at any certain speed.

Ruling a quick pitch didn't seem to fit, because that only refers to the batter being ready.

I'm interested in the oppinions here, in ASA or Fed.

Thanks,
Roger Greene

WestMichBlue has brought this up before (on eteamz, at least, of not here)

What you have is an inattentive umpire. Any umpire that would take his position behind the catcher and call for the pitch with an active baserunner legally "running" (although slowly) the bases needs to find another avocation.

"The umpire that offered the sitch stated he had received an interp from someone at USSSA that the runner was out for being off base before second pitch was released.(I'm not sure who offered the interp, or if it was official.)"

The custodial engineer (janitor) was the only one on duty. He answered the call.

I'm with Dakota.

Bob

The umpire didn't call for the pitch, but he didn't kill the ball because the runner was still advancing. (That is the problem with my suggestion of calling no pitch--the ball is dead and now what do you do with the runner?)

Roger Greene

In a way I feel putting the runner back at the previous base "cheats" the runner is she was trying to advance. However, it is the batter's fault for taking her position.

Speaking ASA.

I certainly don't believe you can even come close to faulting the batter. The batter is not only encouraged to stay ready, but required by rule to keep one foot in the box between pitches unless circumstance prevents it.

Tom is correct that the umpire should have not taken his/her position until the runner completed her running task.

If the umpire isn't in position, then you have nothing more than the pitcher throwing the ball to the catcher to prevent the runner from scoring.

If the umpire is in position, and the BU notices and call "no pitch", I would follow ASA's guideline set forth in their obstruction ruling that when the ball is killed due to a defensive violation, the runner is placed based upon the base to which they are the closest at the time of the call.

Under no circumstance can you rule the runner out for simply playing the game.

I believe, in ASA, you have the wording "immediately" with regard to how the runner should move in whichever direction she has chosen once the pitcher has the ball in the circle. Therefore, if the runner is still walking I don't feel she has been penalized by calling "no-pitch" and putting her back on base. If she really wanted to steal, she should have run!

True, but that refers to making the decision and beginning moving - it says nothing about how fast.

But does that not apply only to the look-back once the runner has come to a stop? Certainly, it does not apply to runner legally leaving the base in an attempt to advance to the next in a continual motion. BTW, there is no mention of a runner being required to "run" at any point in the game.

So it's no pitch. In ASA, the runner gets the closest base and in NFHS goes back to 2nd.

Speaking ASA

Only if the umpire is not doing their job, or the pitcher, catcher and batter are not paying attention.

The umpire should be out from behind the catcher toward 3B, mask in left hand watching the runner advance to 3B. As the PU is moving to that position, s/he may want to quietly state, "step out, batter" in an even further effort to prevent a possible problem. If none of this grabs the girls' attention and the pitcher begins the delivery with a batter in the box, then I would rule "no pitch" and place the runner on the closest base.

I do not certify with ASA, but I presume that there are certain circumstances which give a batter the liberty to step out of the batter's box. If one of those circumstances has occurred, then I think it would be the duty of the coach to offer any coaching advice to the batter. The umpire stating, "step out, batter" would seem to me to be a directive and I'm not sure an umpire would have that authority if not calling time.

As for moving out of the PU's ball/strike-calling position to a place slightly toward third base, I would think this would be a good suggestion... even if the call at third is not the PU's call.

If the umpire is out of position and if the pitcher were to deliver a legal pitch to a batter that is legally in the batter's box, then as far as I know the results of that pitch would stand... ball, strike, out, hit, whatever. In this case, as least in NFHS, the book states that the result of the pitch is a no-pitch, with the runner returning.

The only time I have seen anything close to this happening was in rec baseball when rain was threatening and the winning offensive team was trying to get to the end of five so they would have a legal game. I can't imagine it ever happening in a fast pitch softball game. If they want an out, just leave the base early.

Of course he would. He's telling the batter that no pitch is going to happen right now, so relax. The batter is obligated to keep one foot in the box between pitches as a means to avoid delaying the game. If the umpire's attention is on a runner between bases, the batter is hardly delaying the game if s/he steps out.

If I'm standing up watching a runner, and the pitcher is silly enough to try a pitch, I'm sure not "calling" the pitch, or letting any result stand. If necessary, I'll use ASA Rule 6FP-10D to call a "no pitch."

"None of us liked that, as there is no rule requiring a runner to advance at any certain speed."

ASA Rule 8, Section 7, T-1
The Runner Is Out
A runner is legitimately off a base after a pitch or as a result of a batter completing a turn at bat, and while the pitcher has control of the ball within an eight foot (2.44m) radius of the pitcher's plate, the runner may stop once, but then must immediately return to the base or attempt to advance to the next base.


"True, but that refers to making the decision and beginning moving - it says nothing about how fast"


The words "must immediately return or must immediately attempt to advance" seem to imply the total movement of the batter - not just beginning moving. (IMHO) If, in my judgement, I have a runner attempting to immediately advance to the next base ( in which case the runner will be running, NOT walking or strolling), and the pitcher steps on the pitcher's plate, as the PU I would call a "no-pitch" and allow that runner to attain the next base. If my timing is correct and the runner is truly attempting to advance, the runner will be reaching the base at about the same time I complete my "no-pitch" call. However, if the runner is merely walking or strolling between bases and the pitcher is clearly in the circle with control of the ball, then I don't believe the runner is truly "immediately attempting to advance". Maybe attempting to distract the pitcher, but not really attempting to advance.

They don't imply that, and I don't infer that. The runner is obligated to decide immediately, and indicate that decision by starting to move immediately. The runner must continue, non-stop, toward the base chosen. The runner cannot, according to my high school physics teacher, "immediately" advance to the base, so there is no implication here of speed. Only movement.

Actually, what I would do is make an obvious move to indicate to the pitcher that she is not to pitch - move out up the baseline, move out into the infield, verbal command, something.

I disagree with your good/bad assessment of the runner's play. Base runners are allowed to, as Mike said, play the game.

Is a runner doing something shady because the runner attempts to get into a hot box in order to allow another runner to score? No. It is part of the game.

If a "no pitch" is necessary here (and the umpire should not jump the gun on that), then the runner will be "penalized" (sort of) by being sent back if her "advance" was so slow that she had not reached the half-way point at the time the ball was declared dead. But, the umpire should not attempt to enforce any particular style of play on the participants.

My problem with the original posting is that R2 continues strolling slowly after the pitcher is ready to pitch. If she were trying to draw a throw, she has obviously failed. Not getting into position as the PU would work for a moment, but if the pitcher has committed NOT to throw, and the runner wants to move at a snail's pace, what then? Seems to me the rule is not being enforced if I do nothing but allow this foolishness. I have only seen anything similar to this in 9/10 softball when I have had two unevenly matched teams, and the more dominant team continues to run bases non-stop after the pitcher has the ball in circle simply because the pitcher doesn't have a clue as to what to do. Even then, the runners are RUNNING, not strolling slowly. True, base runners are allowed to play the game, and umpires are allowed to enforce the rules of the game.
Also, as I interpret POE #33 in ASA, under section B, a runner strolling slowly is not immediately proceeding, are they? Can you honestly say that strolling slowly and immediately proceeding are one and the same?

[Edited by pollywolly60 on Sep 2nd, 2003 at 10:16 AM]

That was implied by the "sitch" happening, fictitious or not.

I agree with the positioning, but no hints to either team.

The pitcher being ready to pitch has no bearing on the base runners continuing to advance. IOW, the pitcher cannot end the play merely by ignoring it.It will work for as long as the active base running continues.What rule? As long as the base runner is moving (no stop, no change of direction), the lookback rule does not come into effect. That's because good defenses can deal with this and it won't happen very often. However, that says nothing about the legality of it. I don't know why you want to put yourself in the middle of the play. Is it just because it offends you?No, I don't. One refers to making an immediate decision to proceed. The other referes to continuing to move. What do you do with the 1st sentence, 3rd paragraph on p 151 of the same POE? <font color=blue>"If a runner is moving toward a base, other than first base, when the pitcher receives the ball in the circle, that runner must continue toward that base or be called out."</font> Hmmm... moving... continue.

Finally, you keep, inappropriately, trying to apply the lookback rule to the situation presented. It is not a lookback situation, since the runner continued to move.

The rule that was suggest that applies is ASA 8-7S (not T). 8-7S is not the proper rule to apply here, for the reasons already stated. If more clarity is needed, there are two rules under 8-8, THE RUNNER IS NOT OUT, and apply.

One (8-8J), is identical to the NFHS rule 8-8-10 already cited. The other is 8-8K, <font color=blue>"THE RUNNER IS NOT OUT. When the runner has legally started to advance. The runner may not be stopped by the pitcher receiving the ball while on the pitching plate, or by the pitcher stepping on the plate with the ball in his possession.:"</font>

Summarizing: unless the runner stops (and since I'm not measuring her progress with a laser range finder, appearing to stop is the same as stopping), she is not in violation of lookback. "Immediately" in 8-7T (and the POE) applies to the decision, not to the speed of movement once the decision is made.

The umpire's focus in this situation should be on the base runner, and on preventing the pitcher from attempting a pitch while active baserunning is still ongoing. Under no circumstances is the baserunner OUT, including if the pitcher does pitch. If the pitcher does pitch, then it is just a throw to the catcher unless the batter does something that requires the umpire to treat it like a pitch (i.e hit the ball). In that case, apply 6-10D to declare a no pitch and place the runners as appropriate.

The umpire should not dictate the style of play so long as the rules of the game are not begin violated. Just because an attempt to draw a throw didn't work doesn't mean that the umpire should inject himself into how the play concludes.

I'm often glad that Tom types better and faster than I do.

I'm not sure about "preventing the pitcher from attempting a pitch", but the rest is right on. My concern is not giving hints or tips about what is going on and if the runner is deliberately sneaking to 3rd, stopping the pitcher probably would draw attention to the runner.

Watching an active runner advance and being in the prescribed position when doing so is not offering a team a hint.

Telling the batter to "step out" is a preventive measure which gives no one any indication of what is happening. As I noted, you are stating it quietly which the batter (who has no bearing on a possible play at this point in time) and, maybe, the catcher is going to hear you. I don't believe that statement will draw the catcher to the play toward 3B. If anything, it may draw her attention away from the play.

If you have to literally "stop" the pitcher (batter in the box), then it should be ruled a "no pitch".

Why would you as an umpire even be behind the catcher while a player is running(walking)(skipping)around the bases?????? Don't you have a position to be in with players moving between bases.

That said, If you do find yourself behind the catcher, haven't you not been ready to play before. I have. I just tell the batter and catcher I'm not ready yet. "Hang on a sec batter, I'm not ready yet" usually does the trick.

It was stated earlier that on a no-pitch in ASA the runner gets closest base and in NFHS the runner returns. What is that ASA rule (or where is it?)

Well said.

As Mike said, above, if you have to actually stop the pitcher (hold up your hand, whatever), then you've backed into "no pitch" or the functional equivalent. I was trying to walk that line in my response, above. IOW, when I said "preventing the pitcher..." I meant by means of my positioning, etc., not by holding up the "stop sign" - which effectively kills the play. I can see how what I wrote could be read to mean actively stopping the pitcher.

Wow, thanks Tom (Dakota), I'm glad you typed out everything I was thinking.

Tom is correct guys and gals.

Well, here is part of my post.

Go to ASA POE #35, page 153, third paragraph from the top of the page.

Lets talk mechanics a little.
 

Suppose you're working a one-man system when this situation comes up. Do you sort of stroll down toward 3rd matching the runner's pace thereby eventually tipping the defense on to what's going on; or do you sort of hang around the plate area, then try to sprint into the best position you can get once the pitcher finally wakes up and makes a last minute throw to 3rd, knowing full well that you are probably going to be moving on the tag; or do you hang around the plate and try to make the call from a steady position 55 feet away?

SamC

Re: Lets talk mechanics a little.
 

My belief would be that you would walk down to about midway between home and third, which is where you should be in this situation in one man mechanics. I don't feel this would tip the defense off (if they aren't tipped off by a walking runner already), and this is also what is expected of you. Furthermore, being stationed in this position would also help to keep the pitcher from pitching, as has been hashed over completely in this thread.

Well, this has been interesting, but in real games, what is the chance of this occurring? If it does occur, (as has alredy been stated) youve got either a dumb, asleep, or blind catcher, pitcher, base coach, umpire etc. If the runner is attempting to make third, and pitcher ignores her, I believe even my fat old self could finish the run before the next pitch is delivered. If the runner is trying to become an out, oblige her, call her out and move on.

Whenever a 10U coach reads this post and decides to try it sometime is when it will happen.

This doesn't reflect on the look-back rule, but it does on the issue of the umpire being aware of and in position to make a call and to not prematurely or unnecessarily kill a play.

Actually, a similar play happens ROUTINELY in the SP game. I don't know how many times I do not call time because a runner is slowly moving in the direction of the next base. Of course, most AAs are too dumb to understand the logic, unless they are on the offensive side of the field in this case.

The defense goes crazy when I do not immediately call time at their request, but I'm not suppose to call time as long as the play is not over. And as long as that runner is advancing at any pace, the play is not yet over. I'm not talking about a runner just standing off the base, I'm refering to a runner who is moving.

This discussion is the beauty of this board. Probably none of us will ever see this happen in a game without the defense responding. But what has happened is we have been forced to THINK and some have been forced to open the Rule book. There has been a lively discussion and undoubtably most of us have learned something new or at least something about how to look at the rules and how to apply them. This is good for us all.

copycat :D

It doesn't matter if it is realistic. Hypotheticals are good, because they allow us to develop insight into the rules with a defined situation and now apparently go off into a discussion of coverage mechanics.

Are you also tempted to call verbal obstruction when a fielder near you yells "TIME" and the runner stops and retreats?

On the other side of the coin, I think it would be fun to play a SP game with the look-back rule.

No, absolutely not. If the runner is as stupid as the fielder to believe that a player may call time instead of the umpire, shame on them.

But what if you believe it was done to try to make the runner think the official called it?

Though I don't think a player is smart enough to emulate the call, my response is still "Nope". Stupid is as stupid does. I am not the player's fairy godmother.

Not only do they need to play the game, but runners are the only people in the game which are allowed additional audio/visual aides on the field in the form of base coaches.

Good! :)