NFHS Test 2, #76

[zebracz]

Hey ya'll...did anyone else have trouble w/ this question? rule 3-3-1c says the offender is ejected. The question (#76) says: "A player at bat discovered to be wearing a necklace would be declared out if his team had received a prior warning concerning jewelry."

So, yes, he's ejected but I can't find ANYWHERE that says he's out--so I'd consider a sub to replace him, IF HE WERE ON BASE. First, what would you think of that, and second, is that batter OUT as well, because he's a batter and not a base runner?

Thx

[Delaware Blue]

Without looking, I'd say nothing in the FED rule allows an out for wearing jewelry. After the team warning, eject the batter and a legal sub takes his place and assumes the count (if any).

Now, if no legal subs are available, an out would be declared because that spot in the batting order is empty. But the out is called due to the empty spot in the order, not because of wearing jewelry.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by zebracz
Hey ya'll...did anyone else have trouble w/ this question? rule 3-3-1c says the offender is ejected. The question (#76) says: "A player at bat discovered to be wearing a necklace would be declared out if his team had received a prior warning concerning jewelry."

The statement is False.

If you quoted it correctly and if FED gave the answer as True, then I'd guess they messed it up.

[JJ]

The FED answer to #76 IS False. 3-3-1c penalty.

[cowbyfan1]

I agree but keep in mind that the fed test 2 years ago said out can call a player out on an appeal when the player is not even at the ball game and last year said that a coach restricted to the dugout cannot be ejected due to further disipline issues.