Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by Stripes13
I am confused, test question #79...
"If B1 scores and then commits a throw-in plane violation. Following the team warning, Team A will retain the privilege of making the throw-in from anywhere along the end line."
That should be false should it not? The throw-in plane violation after the team warning results in a Technical Foul doesn't it? The tech FTs are administered and the resulting throw-in is from division line opposite the table..
They would not retain the privilege of running the end line.
What am I missing here?
|
Typical test NFHS verbiage. Could be a l'il clearer.Correct answer is true. This particular throw-in plane violation resulted in a warning, and that warning is then followed by the rest of the penalty for the plane violation- a repeat throw-in by any A player along the end line. Iow, team B did not have a recorded warning when they committed the plane violation; they committed a plane violation that resulted in a warning AND a repeat throw-in.
The amended question should probably read as above.
[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Oct 28th, 2004 at 07:44 AM]
|
Unfortunately, JR, the first part of what you wrote is not a sentence. It is definitely true though that the NFHS wording is unclear.
The NFHS should have written, "If B1 scores and then commits a throw-in plane violation, Team A will retain the privilege of making the throw-in from anywhere along the end line following the team warning."
|
I agree the biggest problem with the NFHS tests are the wording. They try to be tricky with the questions, but in doing so they completely confuse the readers.
Most of the questions that I miss are simply because I was in a hurry and did not read the question properly, not that I did not know the rule or ruling.
This is especially tough on young officials or new officials because after a few years and from different sports, you learn that you have to read the questions
v e r y c a r e f u l l y ! !
Thanks
David