Circle Violation Clarification - Pitcher hand positioning

[tcannizzo]

Are you serious? Ever seen a player picked off that originated from a fake throw?
If yes, then your post is absurd.
If no, then your post is absurd.

Ooooh, so now a "play" is defined as "everything that occurs prior to the actual attempt to execute an out."

I see. I'll keep that in mind when I hit the field later...

Change that to "everything that occurs that may lead to an out" and you will still not have the exact definition, but it would be closer than what you have written.

[Battle]

What was the original intentions of the look back rule? Wasn't it to keep the runner from bouncing back and forth between bases disrupting the game?

[UmpSteve]

What was the original intentions of the look back rule? Wasn't it to keep the runner from bouncing back and forth between bases disrupting the game?

As explained to me (about 40) years ago, it was to stop runners from "daring" the pitcher into making a play. No "cat and mouse" standing off the base to instigate a play. Even today, that can kill low-level games where the defense chooses to do everything BUT get the ball to the pitcher in the circle. Fastpitch chose the option to put the onus on the runner to make an immediate and one-time decision, but limited it to interaction with the pitcher; slowpitch chose to call "time" as quickly as no immediate play was evident.

Over the years, the tweaks spelled out in the rule and rules supplement were added to address the abuses created by those intent on finding loopholes to get around the absolute intention of the rule.

[MTR]

As explained to me (about 40) years ago, it was to stop runners from "daring" the pitcher into making a play. No "cat and mouse" standing off the base to instigate a play. Even today, that can kill low-level games where the defense chooses to do everything BUT get the ball to the pitcher in the circle. Fastpitch chose the option to put the onus on the runner to make an immediate and one-time decision, but limited it to interaction with the pitcher; slowpitch chose to call "time" as quickly as no immediate play was evident.

Over the years, the tweaks spelled out in the rule and rules supplement were added to address the abuses created by those intent on finding loopholes to get around the absolute intention of the rule.

In a recent conversation, it was noted that the Godfather of Softball Rules, Tom Mason would have just explained the rule as, "When the pitcher gets the ball, the runner has to go either this way or that". The original rule was that simple. Now, it has become punitive to the point of detracting from the game and player accomplishments.

[Battle]

As explained to me (about 40) years ago, it was to stop runners from "daring" the pitcher into making a play. No "cat and mouse" standing off the base to instigate a play. Even today, that can kill low-level games where the defense chooses to do everything BUT get the ball to the pitcher in the circle. Fastpitch chose the option to put the onus on the runner to make an immediate and one-time decision, but limited it to interaction with the pitcher; slowpitch chose to call "time" as quickly as no immediate play was evident.

Over the years, the tweaks spelled out in the rule and rules supplement were added to address the abuses created by those intent on finding loopholes to get around the absolute intention of the rule.

In a recent conversation, it was noted that the Godfather of Softball Rules, Tom Mason would have just explained the rule as, "When the pitcher gets the ball, the runner has to go either this way or that". The original rule was that simple. Now, it has become punitive to the point of detracting from the game and player accomplishments.

Did Tom Mason invent this rule because that was my next question? I would like to ask what the original intentions to the rule were. I can't imagine someone making it this complicated with a fake throw. I would assume it was simple. When the the pitcher has possesion of the ball in her glove (that is on her hand, not on the ground etc.) or her throwing hand (not under her arm etc.) and is in the circle, the runner has to commit to a base or she is out. Fake throw or not.

[Battle]

If you have a runner on third and the batter walks, if the look back rule doesn't go into affect until the BR reaches 1st, can the runner on third basically dance around until the BR reaches 1st without the possibility of being called out?

[UmpSteve]

If you have a runner on third and the batter walks, if the look back rule doesn't go into affect until the BR reaches 1st, can the runner on third basically dance around until the BR reaches 1st without the possibility of being called out?

Yes. That is (in the big picture) a more recent change, my guesstimate +- last 10 years. Not sure why it changed, but previously all runners were affected as soon as the pitcher had the ball in the circle.

I can only surmise someone influential thought there were too many "gotcha" outs for runners off third standing and watching instead of returning when the pitcher got the ball.

[tcannizzo]

Notice what UmpSteve wrote in that is only the Pitcher that this rule applies. ASA is not anti-cat and mouse per se. It has more to do with baserunning rules that runners must be in contact with a base at the time of the pitch. So, when P has control of the ball in the circle and is not in the process of making a play, this is interpreted that she is "ready to pitch", and that the baserunners must then get to a base within the prescribed Look Back Rule. Hence the runner can be simply "looked back to a base".

Footnote: and it is not any time P has the ball, but she must be in the circle, with control of the ball and not making a play. Runners are free to "dare" P to make a play, and invite cat-and-mouse action if P is outside the circle.

[Comp]

Footnote: and it is not any time P has the ball, but she must be in the circle, with control of the ball and not making a play. Runners are free to "dare" P to make a play, and invite cat-and-mouse action if P is outside the circle.

2nd Footnote, ASA is I believe the only association which states posession and control. All other rule sets I can think of at the moment only specify posession.

[MTR]

Did Tom Mason invent this rule because that was my next question?

Invent? Don't know and Tom wouldn't take credit even if he did.

I would like to ask what the original intentions to the rule were. I can't imagine someone making it this complicated with a fake throw. I would assume it was simple. When the the pitcher has possesion of the ball in her glove (that is on her hand, not on the ground etc.) or her throwing hand (not under her arm etc.) and is in the circle, the runner has to commit to a base or she is out. Fake throw or not.

You have been told a couple of time in this thread. It was to avoid the cat and mouse game. (FYI, I have heard him use this phrase)

As Steve noted, what has caused all the consternation are all the people who have looked for and abused what they consider loopholes.

AFA requiring the ball to be in the hands and not under an arm, between the knees, etc. is because the pitcher cannot put out a runner without throwing the ball or tagging the runner out without the ball in their hands. IOW, the pitcher cannot make a play without the ball being in their hands.

Unfortunately, it is still possible to have the cat and mouse game with pitchers faking a throw or the catcher constantly running players back to bases which is why I prefer the SP mechanic.