Look Back Rule After Base on Balls

[02Crush]

@Comp
B/C when I read the rule and in summary it states that after stopping momentarily the runner must either advance or return to base I get confused when I then ask multiple umpires about it through 6 tournaments hosted by three different Softball Organizations only to get different explanations each time. BTW, the three explanations I listed in my original post were those explanations of some umpires.
I had always thought it was the action of the runner that once they passed the base that had been awarded unobstructed (my thinking was it being a dead ball play) that once the runner passed 1st base it made the play live again. Basically the Batter Runner is awarded the base freely but only first base and should they pass it they run the risk of being put out.
Thanks this time for at least pasting in the reference so I can reference it. As MTR stated earlier. I think it should just go away. If Softball Organizations want to keep a short timed game moving in a tournament they should just state that there should be no playing chicken with the pitcher once play is stopped and restarted or something like it. As always any confusion as a coach seems to come from umpires interpretations of rules which I am not allowed to challenge as it is "their Judgement".
@ Sweet Lou - Thanks
@ Amy in AZ. - You may be correct and I may have read this in an incorrect section of ASA.
It helps that Comp referenced it for me.

BTW..Does anyone know where I can buy and updated version of ASA rules without playing ASA ball? Our ASA is not very strong right now locally. Director just left and is moving to another organization among other things so we are not playing with them yet.

 

[BretMan]

ASA rule books do sometimes pop up on eBay or Amazon. ASA does not sell them. You might try contacting your local or state ASA commissioner (their contact info can be found on the ASA website). Some treat rule books like they are gold or their first born, others seem to pass them out like candy. Can't hurt to ask.

Sorry to hear that your umpires seem confused about the Look Back Rule. But if an umpire calls your runner out because she rounded first base, then returned to first, don't buy his explanation that it's "his judgment" she's out. That is a clear misapplication of a playing rule and 100% protestable. Saying that this is a judgment call is like saying it's his judgment that a batter should be called out on two strikes instead of three!

 

[MTR]

I do not know everything nor do I claim to. I suspect many other here do not either. Many of us are seeking understanding or clarification of things.

Which is why the umpires on this and other boards become adament in correcting the misconceptions of some. This is especially so when there is an attempt to justify a ruling by citing an umpire's call. What an umpire is trained to watch on the field and what others watch are often two different views and when presenting a scenario, the non-umpire doesn't always provide all the information needed. Not because they are trying to hide it, but simply because they did not notice or didn't recognize it as relevant.

The slightest movement of a runner or fielder can completely change the manner in which a rule or ruling is applied. And the rules, as previously noted, are not a one-sentence/paragraph issue that can just be rattled off as the final answer. In some cases, there can be three or four separate rules and/or interpretations that may apply to a single play and it isn't feasible to expect someone to sit here and type out pages of information.

Maybe even to compare occurrences to gain a better understanding of them. With that said it would have been nice to have someone reference a rule book and explain my incorrect statements to me rather than make cute jokes about headaches.

Well, whether you like it or not, composition is an important tool in communicating in the written word. And yes, trying to read some of these posts can be problematic and the "joke" wasn't meant to be cute.

A scenario is offered, well qualified umpires with experience in multiple sanctioning bodies offer a valid response and then an argument ensues because somewhere along the way, this or that happened to their team and they were given, or thought they were given a valid explanation.

And the umpires become repetitive and, at times, terse because there are hundreds of others reading these messages. As long as others continue to post inaccurate rule applications or claims, the umpires are going to try and help insure others are not being misled.

 

[02Crush]

Well, whether you like it or not, composition is an important tool in communicating in the written word.

I do not disagree with you and this is why I deleted my post as it was poorly written in a tired moment and came across incorrectly. I just felt the joke was not necessary.

As long as others continue to post inaccurate rule applications or claims, the umpires are going to try and help insure others are not being misled.

I will take this to mean you are an umpire who takes this seriously. If so I will view you as a another reference point for questions and explanations. But as a new board member who is to know your background and why you are more justified in correcting someone versus another person?
While you are defending a position of umpires here I will defend the other side. There are far too many umpires out their who do not care as much and it shows. Just as there are far too many coaches who should not be in the role. When it was rec ball most of us could let bad calls slide but now at a higher level of play and competition it should be better managed. When a coach asks for an explanation of something in a game, something that on this board seems to be a very clear rule to you and others, and receives three different responses from umpires it is ridiculous. I and others play in a world where they are the experts and we are not allowed to challenge anything. Even when you have a legitimate challenge in an effort understand a rule many umpires will not respond, only telling you it is their ruling and to go away. Maybe it is b/c at 10U age, where I coach, the newer umpires are in the field and they are developing experience for older ages and higher competition? I do not know for sure. But thus far, in six tournaments, I have only seen two who were really good at their job, took it seriously and were properly prepared to rule on a game and back it up. They were also the only ones that if approached in a reasonable fashion, during a moment not disrupting the game, would offer explanations to a coach trying to learn more. Sometimes it is the manner in which thy carry out their duties that is frustrating. But then again I can see how dealing with many coaches who are totally of their rocker and aggressive can lead to a wall being put up for all coaches. So I am not totally insensitive to what they deal with from a good 60% of the coaches out there.
MTR, I applaud you for wanting to set the record straight but again ask for a reference point rather than merely being told I am wrong or being made fun. I still feel the Tylenol comment was not needed. But no harm no foul. Thank you for explaining your perspective rather than lashing back at me. Many would have chosen the later option and it would have only made it worse.

 

[MTR]

I will take this to mean you are an umpire who takes this seriously. If so I will view you as a another reference point for questions and explanations. But as a new board member who is to know your background and why you are more justified in correcting someone versus another person?

You will learn who the umpires are. We will cite the rules and various interpretations we have received from the respective associations.

While you are defending a position of umpires here I will defend the other side. There are far too many umpires out their who do not care as much and it shows. Just as there are far too many coaches who should not be in the role. When it was rec ball most of us could let bad calls slide but now at a higher level of play and competition it should be better managed. When a coach asks for an explanation of something in a game, something that on this board seems to be a very clear rule to you and others, and receives three different responses from umpires it is ridiculous.

No argument, it is a battle I fight regularly.

I and others play in a world where they are the experts and we are not allowed to challenge anything. Even when you have a legitimate challenge in an effort understand a rule many umpires will not respond, only telling you it is their ruling and to go away.

Well, I may tell you to return to the bench, but you will receive a response. May not be the one you want, but you will get your say and I will listen (assuming it is a valid issue related to the immediate previous play and you act like an intelligent human being). If you jump around and scream and holler, you will probably not get much consideration. There is one thing I can promise you. I will not argue with you. If you want to act the fool, help yourself. By the time you get finished, you will have a seat, one place or another and the game will move on. Where that seat is located will be entirely left up to you in your actions and words.

Maybe it is b/c at 10U age, where I coach, the newer umpires are in the field and they are developing experience for older ages and higher competition? I do not know for sure. But thus far, in six tournaments, I have only seen two who were really good at their job, took it seriously and were properly prepared to rule on a game and back it up. They were also the only ones that if approached in a reasonable fashion, during a moment not disrupting the game, would offer explanations to a coach trying to learn more.

Two things here. I believe a competitive 10U level is where you need the experienced umpire. Anyone who tells you "I don't do THAT level of ball" isn't worth the sand in the bottom of his/her ball bag. Experienced umpires (at least, one per crew) are necessary because if something strange is going to happen, the level is the most likely place and you need an umpire who knows how to handle sticky situations and that is rarely a rookie.

Second, I'm not going to hold a clinic on the field during the game. You have a question about a play, ask it then and there. Once it is over, I'm moving on. You have a question about a previous play, ask it. I may not respond right away, may even wait until after the game.

Sometimes it is the manner in which thy carry out their duties that is frustrating. But then again I can see how dealing with many coaches who are totally of their rocker and aggressive can lead to a wall being put up for all coaches. So I am not totally insensitive to what they deal with from a good 60% of the coaches out there.

You many not care for the manner in which they carry out their duties, but do you know how they are supposed to carry out their duties? Remember, the umpire is there to officiate the ball game, not train players and coaches. That is why there are clinics, scrimmages and practices.

MTR, I applaud you for wanting to set the record straight but again ask for a reference point rather than merely being told I am wrong or being made fun. I still feel the Tylenol comment was not needed.

Yet is was successful in getting your attention.

 

[FPMark]

I will take this to mean you are an umpire who takes this seriously. If so I will view you as a another reference point for questions and explanations. But as a new board member who is to know your background and why you are more justified in correcting someone versus another person?

After reading and debating rules with MTR for a while now, I have come to believe that he was most likely the original author of the ASA rule book.

 

[MTR]

After reading and debating rules with MTR for a while now, I have come to believe that he was most likely the original author of the ASA rule book.

No, but I was talking to one of the more prolific authors of today's rules last night, and I'm not talking about in my sleep, either.

 

[Greenmonsters]

Thomas - welcome and one piece of friendly advice. It ain't personal. If the Tylenol joke upset you, don't ever think of visiting heybucket.com DFP is one of the most civil forums I've ever come across. You likely would need therapy after a HB noob dressdown.

FWIW, MTR, Comp, and Brettman are among the noted go to folks for answering umpiring questions here. Personally, I kinda think of them as this board's butcher, baker, and candlestick maker. Gotta go before they try to run me. Rub-adub-dub and Happy Holidays!

 

[honus14]

MTR may not broadcast his qualifications, but believe me, he knows the rules like I know . . . well, absolutely nothing, actually, but he knows the rules better than anyone.

 

[Amy in AZ.]

Also, I have never known Bretman to make a rules mistake, either. He knows several different rules sets and is an active umpire. See him for your glove repairs.

I don't know him, personally.