2016 NCAA Test Discussion

[Forest Ump]

2 minutes ago, noumpere said:

I think this year that everyone has the same #17 -- but the answers might be in a different order.

Oh Snap. It looks like you may be right. Thats great.

[GreyhoundAggie]

Taking the test made me realize how much I have to learn about the rules still. Definitely a bit nervous since I haven't called NCAA ball before

[noumpere]

24 minutes ago, GreyhoundAggie said:

Taking the test made me realize how much I have to learn about the rules still. Definitely a bit nervous since I haven't called NCAA ball before

that is (or should be -- too many don't take it that way) one of the goals of the test.

 

I found this year's test (at least on my first pass through it) to be pretty easy.  Only a few I had to look up references for.  That said, I haven't submitted it yet, so maybe my 'easy" means I got about 50%.

[johnnyg08]

28 minutes ago, noumpere said:

that is (or should be -- too many don't take it that way) one of the goals of the test.

 

I found this year's test (at least on my first pass through it) to be pretty easy.  Only a few I had to look up references for.  That said, I haven't submitted it yet, so maybe my 'easy" means I got about 50%.

There are several questions that I've seen so far that are very detail oriented...making us get into the rule book to actually read the rule and corresponding AR's

[GreyhoundAggie]

2 hours ago, noumpere said:

that is (or should be -- too many don't take it that way) one of the goals of the test.

 

I found this year's test (at least on my first pass through it) to be pretty easy.  Only a few I had to look up references for.  That said, I haven't submitted it yet, so maybe my 'easy" means I got about 50%.

I used the rule book a lot and not ashamed to admit it. But I am also very used to FED rules and rarely if ever call OBR. A lot of difference, plus the rules surrounding whats an official game, pitching infractions, suspensions, etc we don't deal with in FED.

[maineump]

12 minutes ago, GreyhoundAggie said:

I used the rule book a lot and not ashamed to admit it. But I am also very used to FED rules and rarely if ever call OBR. A lot of difference, plus the rules surrounding whats an official game, pitching infractions, suspensions, etc we don't deal with in FED.

Our assignor said to use the book - the test is written to make us get into the book, and to look up the 'out of the ordinary' rules.

[johnnyg08]

4 hours ago, GreyhoundAggie said:

I used the rule book a lot and not ashamed to admit it. But I am also very used to FED rules and rarely if ever call OBR. A lot of difference, plus the rules surrounding whats an official game, pitching infractions, suspensions, etc we don't deal with in FED.

Absolutely.  For me, I look up every question, even the ones I know for sure.  Yes, it's more work, but sometimes I see other things while looking for what I was looking for!  

[johnnyg08]

For me, the first couple I saw involved when we do or do not have jurisdiction and for what aspects of the game?

When do we have jurisdiction for tobacco?

When do we have jurisdiction for unsportsmanlike behavior? 

Those are things that are meant to be looked up...certainly there are guys out there who know that stuff forward & backward, but the point of the test is to get our noses into the book.

[grayhawk]

I looked up every question in the book and wrote down the rule reference.  #34 is the only one that I am unsure of at this point and it's driving me crazy.

[johnnyg08]

23 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

I looked up every question in the book and wrote down the rule reference.  #34 is the only one that I am unsure of at this point and it's driving me crazy.

By the letter of the rule, that's a tricky one...the rule states that you can't go to the mouth from the rubber.  

By rule, I suppose we charge a ball to the hitter?  By the letter of the rule.  

[johnnyg08]

In my mind, I feel like the ball needs to be live for us to charge a ball though.  It could very easily be "nothing"

What's your thought process on this one?

[grayhawk]

how can you add a penalty when the ball isn't in play?

 

If the pitcher violates the 90 second rule between innings, or the 20 second rule between pitches (on a foul ball, so the ball is dead) then a ball is added to the batter's count. So there is a precedent for adding a penalty when the ball isn't in play.

[johnnyg08]

8 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

If the pitcher violates the 90 second rule between innings, or the 20 second rule between pitches (on a foul ball, so the ball is dead) then a ball is added to the batter's count. So there is a precedent for adding a penalty when the ball isn't in play.

On the 20...wouldn't it be after we made it live?  

[grayhawk]

On the 20...wouldn't it be after we made it live?  

The clock starts after the pitcher receives the ball "on the mound." The ball doesn't have to be in play.

[johnnyg08]

Contrary to the rule...I really think it's nothing because the ball is dead

[johnnyg08]

Based on how the question is written we know how to answer it w/o even watching the video.

The question I have is in this game they only called out R1 and put the batter-runner on first.  In the Handling Situations video the NCAA agreed with how the umpires handled it in that game, yet they use this video clip to suggest that they want two out here.

It seems inconsistent.  Anybody else see it differently?  

[noumpere]

8 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

Based on how the question is written we know how to answer it w/o even watching the video.

The question I have is in this game they only called out R1 and put the batter-runner on first.  In the Handling Situations video the NCAA agreed with how the umpires handled it in that game, yet they use this video clip to suggest that they want two out here.

It seems inconsistent.  Anybody else see it differently?  

It's "inconsistent' only because they changed the premise from unintentional interference to intentional interference.

[johnnyg08]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

It's "inconsistent' only because they changed the premise from unintentional interference to intentional interference.

So we simply treat it as a hypothetical right?  

[GreyhoundAggie]

A couple questions i was unsure on.

One question had to do with what was the score of the game if the home team was up 2-0 at end of 6. VT scores 4 in top 7, HT scores 2 in bottom 7 and is still batting but game gets rained out. What is the proper score? The wording in that section of the rulebook was a bit confusing because it referred to if the HT scored the same number of runs as the VT, the score reverts to the prior completed inning. However I wasn't sure if it meant same number of runs overall, or in that particular inning. What's the verdict here?

The other one is on the play where R3 intentionally interferes with a foul fly ball. Do you get both R3 and B/R here since there was intentional interference? Or only R3 since it was a foul ball?

Still getting used to there having to be intentional interference to get 2 in NCAA (except FPSR).

[lawump]

Question #50 was the most poorly written question on the exam, IMHO. 

[johnnyg08]

13 minutes ago, lawump said:

Question #50 was the most poorly written question on the exam, IMHO. 

Based on how the question was written, we have to get two outs on this correct?  Regardless of what actually happened in this game?  

At this point, I just want to get the question right.  Intentional interference by a runner with a possible DP is that runner and the batter/runner.  Rule 8-5 something right?  8-5k perhaps?

[lawump]

29 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

Based on how the question was written, we have to get two outs on this correct?  Regardless of what actually happened in this game?  

At this point, I just want to get the question right.  Intentional interference by a runner with a possible DP is that runner and the batter/runner.  Rule 8-5 something right?  8-5k perhaps?

The problem I had was that I could not tell if the examiners were asking us to answer the question assuming that the umpires in the game were correct in their call of intentional interference...or if they were asking us what the call should have been (which, in my opinion, is simple (non-intentional) interference).  I have read, re-read and re-read that question and I still have no idea.  I went with the latter (that they were asking us what the call should have been) and I picked "c". 

I scored a 96 on the test, but they didn't tell me what two questions I missed.  So, I don't know if I got it right or wrong.

[GreyhoundAggie]

I squeaked by with my 85. But there were quite a few questions I wasn't positive on,

[noumpere]

1 hour ago, GreyhoundAggie said:

A couple questions i was unsure on.

One question had to do with what was the score of the game if the home team was up 2-0 at end of 6. VT scores 4 in top 7, HT scores 2 in bottom 7 and is still batting but game gets rained out. What is the proper score? The wording in that section of the rulebook was a bit confusing because it referred to if the HT scored the same number of runs as the VT, the score reverts to the prior completed inning. However I wasn't sure if it meant same number of runs overall, or in that particular inning. What's the verdict here?

The other one is on the play where R3 intentionally interferes with a foul fly ball. Do you get both R3 and B/R here since there was intentional interference? Or only R3 since it was a foul ball?

Still getting used to there having to be intentional interference to get 2 in NCAA (except FPSR).

1) That's question 11.  Tie game, but all the stats count.

 

2)  Question 29.  R3 is out; batter returns with an added strike.

[GreyhoundAggie]

32 minutes ago, noumpere said:

1) That's question 11.  Tie game, but all the stats count.

 

2)  Question 29.  R3 is out; batter returns with an added strike.

I got 11 wrong then. Think I put that it reverts to the previous inning since they equaled the number of runs. Thanks for the clarification.

2) That's what I put. Only get R3 since the ball was foul. Just wasn't positive if NCAA was any different. Thanks noumpere.