It seems that there are more questions this year where umpire's judgement come into play. When judgement is involved, it is hard to quantify and determine what the correct answer should be.
That being said, although I did not take the test online, I have reviewed the questions and answers and had similar thoughts.
In your first question:
Quote:
R1, R3, no outs. B4 attempts to bunt but pops the ball up. R1 is stealing on the pitch. R3 is not stealing. The bunted ball is near home plate. As the catcher moves out to catch the pop up, the batter unintentionally bumps the catcher causing him to drop the pop up. The umpire believes the catcher would have had a chance to double-up R1 if he had not dropped the ball.
a. Since there was no intent by B4, the play stands.
b. Call B4 out, call R3 out and return R1 to first base.
c. Call the batter out and return all runners to the base they occupied at the TOP.
d. Call the batter out and call R1 out for the interference.
|
We can only assume, by the answer they provided, that F2 was in a position to field the pop-up. Since F2 was in a position to make a play on the batted ball, 7-11f(4) does not apply since that rule addresses a batted ball and both the BR and F2 break from their positions, BR to first and F2 chasing after the batted ball, and contact is made with no intent to interfere/obstruct by either player. I don't know why that rule was referenced for this particular question.
8-5e does apply since F2 is in a position to field the ball. Unlike OBR where there has to be a willful and deliberate intent to interference in order to get more than one out, NCAA says that any interference, intentional or not, causes 2 outs when there is a possibility of a double play (umpire judgement). Since the BR unintentionally interfered with F2 making a play on the ball and prevented a possible double play, the BR and the runner closest to home is out.
On your second question:
Quote:
R1 and R3, one out. R1 breaks early toward second base. The pitcher turns inside and throws to second in one motion. R1 is out on the throw as R1 slows down when he hears U3's call of "balk." U1 comes to U3 and asks, "What was the balk?" U1 is informed by the calling umpire that the balk is for throwing to an unoccupied base. U1 alerts the calling umpire that R1 had broken for second before the pitcher had started his inside move and prior to the pitcher's throw to second base.
a. This error in interpretation cannot be changed, the call will stand.
b. Change the call and give no explanation.
c. Change the call and return R1 to first base and R3 back to third and explain to the coach how the crew had misinterpreted the situation.
d. Tell your partner to mind his own business.
|
Once an umpire calls a balk, that call cannot (should not) be undone. It is wrong to suggest that an error in interpretation cannot be changed. That can lead to a protest and that would not be good. If a balk is called erroneously, someone has to step up and provide a reasonable judgement excuse that cannot be protested. This was a very poor question and answer.
The question/answer that I found odd was this:
Quote:
R1 R3, 1 Out. R1 breaks on the pitch. B1 grounds to F6. F6 throws home and retires R3. Seeing R1 head for third, F2 throws there to retire R1 on a very close play. F4's obstruction of R1 between first and second base was recognized and call by U3 at the appropriate time.
a. Award R1 home
b. Award R1 third
c. Return R1 to second
d. R1 is out
Answer: [d] 8-3e(1) Penalty
|
Again a test question on a judgement play. Since they said R1 was out on "a very close play," and that R1 was obstructed and it was recognized, wouldn't it be appropriate to protect R1 to third since he may have made third had the obstruction not occured, especially on a "very close play?"
Tests such as these should not test you on situations where judgement come into play. I hope this is a trend that will quickly go away.
Don't know if this helped JM, but I got to rant a bit.
JMTC