Just loking for some feedback here guys.

Does your state mandate the NFHS Part 1 test in order for you to work high school baseball games?

Is the NFHS Part 2 test given in your state? If so, is it mandated or used for promotion or post season assignments?

In Illinois the Part 1 test is open book and issued with rule books and season info. We have a few weeks to return it or we can take it online and it is scored immediately. (Although, you won't know which ones are incorrect until the testing phase concludes - then an answer key is posted.) It also serves as one element of ranking for post season assignments. (In Illinois, the post season is scheduled by the IHSA) The Part 2 test is used for promotion to the next level, although all officials are encouraged to take it as a refresher or to hone their skills.

Please provide your home state when giving your thoughts.

Who does that?
 

Who encourages anyone to take the Part 2 Exam as a refresher in Illinois?

You cannot get a copy of the Part 2 Exam unless you know someone that took it. Or you can buy the Athletic Rules Study CD from the previous year.

Peace

Michigan
No NFHS test required.
...Not even suggested.
[<I>but they do provide a link to this site.</I>]
mick

You should really read your Officials Handbook and online services better.

For the past twenty years, the IHSA has encouraged all officials to apply for the test and take it. About five years ago, the IHSA began scheduling the Part 2 test and administering it at set locations. They required pre-registering and provided a proctor. Prior to that, the tests could be administered by any recognized organization or assignor. Our group administered the test for years as part of our training program. Again, any official can register for the test and if the testing site has space, you will be allowed to take it. You may not be eligible for promotion, but they have always encouraged continuing education in the form of this test. I know of several certfied Officials that take the Part 2 test every year. The only thing it costs them is an evening in a local high school.

Not sure all areas of Idaho do the same thing. District VI (Idaho Falls) uses the Part I as a tune up. It is handed out with the new rulebooks and everyone pretty much either does it on their own (open book) or just shows up at a subsequent meeting and receives the answers and maybe reviews some of it later.

Part II is a State requirement. A score of 80% is required to work varsity contests. However,... and this varies from year to year, the Part II is taken either individually or as small groups (basically your choice). Either set down with your buddies and your open books and all 'cheat' together for your community answers or be a loner and set down by yourself. Alone, you still have the option of using the books. I've found that once I look-up an answer for a single question, I get into a kind of mode where I want to look-up every answer... "How many outs per inning?" "I know I've seen that in here somewhere... thumb, thumb, thumb." Takes forever to justify every answer. It's a lot easier to forget about trying to find a rule reference for every answer.

I'm sure I look-up a dozen of the questions and in general it is in response to someone's question and me trying to justify my answer. I know the rules well enough to score above 80 without flipping the cover, but I generally find myself looking-up a few answers and getting an upper 90's score.

We take the Part II for baseball and fastpitch softball on the same evening. So, if you work both sports, it can mean a long evening of test taking... and a lot of thumbing if you get into that look-up mode.:D

Some years we have been required to take the tests as closed book. Things go faster then.

Interesting. I remember early in my career I tried to apply to take the exam and I was told I was not eligible to take it. They sent me a letter to tell me I could not take the test and had to wait until my anniversary date had come up.

Funny, I have never heard that come out of the mouth of Dave Gannaway or anyone talk about people not going for promotion can take it. Not at the IHSA Delegate's Meeting or any time I have heard Dave, Kurt or Anthony speak. Or better yet, when I talked to Judy in person she never made mention of that either. I guess you have the inside track. Because the only encouragement I have ever read are those that are up for promotion to take the exam.

BTW, it has been longer than 5 years.

Peace

Here in the pretty state of Missouri:

Part I and II are mandatory (with passing score)1st yr working NFHS, there after you must take Part II each year and atend a mandatory rules meeting that general takes 4 hours. You must also prove you attended by signing an attendance card in the pressence of a state brd member.

Unless you allow your membership to laspe you should never take Part I again.

The state will (as I understand it) request our Association to send umpires to state championship games. The Assco. will assign district and other local playoff games based on our ranking, availibility, performance during the season, and desire. It has some issue if you are overlooked, however, it is a good system.


As an aside: many umpires just want HS to end so we can move onto the Spring wood bat tournements. That is when summer starts!

Here in the BLUE state of Massachusetts there is no such thing as NFHS rules. Thank Gawd. G.

Gee,
Which rules govern baseball in Massachusetts?
If it is OBR, do they also have safety rules in place?

Grazi!

Rut, you are partially correct.

1) The IHSA changed the language of the recent handbook. For many years it recommended that officials should take the Part II test as often as possible. In past books, this was included in the “How to become a better Official” section. It has also been part of the IACAO curriculum for man years.
It was removed from the book, but remained in the packet we received last January.

2) The IHSA now runs the Part II test and requires registration. It is provided at sites (available on-line) and is managed on a space available basis. In other words, if they have twenty five officials requesting promotion, they will be frugal in allowing others to take the test for practice. It costs them money to offer the test, after all.

3) The Part I and II tests are important gauges of baseball knowledge. After a few months in hibernation, the umpire can count on having to crack open the rule and case books in order to complete the test. The Part II proves that you can perform under pressure and do it better than the rest. If you look at the number of Certified umpires in Illinois (compared to the total number of licensed umpires) you will see how special this achievement really is.

I like the old system that allowed groups to administer the Part II test. More people took it and the old tests circulated for others to study the next year. Since it was given on only one day, we had very little risk of the answers leaking out. It six years ago, but the test is still given statewide (by the IHSA) on the same day. If you cannot make it to one of their sites, you have to be given special permission to take it at their headquarters.

We've covered this before. It appears that only a couple of states don't use the tests in some capacity. The majority use them for annual or post season eligibility, promotion or rating criteria.

We use OBR with the Slide or Avoid and the NFHS Bat restrictions (-3) but we don't check unless an opposing coach brings it to our attention. A lot of the Higher Divisions are going to Wood.

We also have Strikes in place of ejections for Managers and coaches. A warning is Strike one and the second one he is gone but we still have the option of running him the first time so it hasn't changed much. The problem is that we now have to write up all Strikes, before it was just for EJ's.

I know that Fed is a pain, but that sounds crazy.
Our unsportsmanlike conduct ejections require written reports, as well.

You said that a Strike is given to coaches as a warning (1st offense). What is his team is on defense? Can multiple coaches receive multiple warnings?

Yes, you can warn (strike) multiple coaches as each one gets a freebee before the heave. If the infraction is severe, like cussing or bumping etc. you can run him the first time.


Actually it is handled just like before except for the write up. Before if a coach or mgr acted up you would warn him, same thing now but it's a strike and you have to write it up. If the coach continued you would ej him, same now with another report.

The only change is the first write-up.

Up here there are very few Ej's, I've only run one mgr in all my years and that was a long time ago. These guys are well controlled and understand the ramifications if they get run. I know all of them and they all know me. Boring.

Well it does not know and has not since they changed the Part 2 Exam administration.

The test is not available on-line. Only the Part 1 Exam is available online. They might tell you what you received on the test, but you cannot take this test online.

That is your opinion. That is not the shared opinion of many umpires or officials in many sports. Because what I read is not about what I see and how I have to react. If you feel it is, you have that right to fell that way. I disagree. What else is new?

You want to talk about cheating? Cheating was one of the reasons they changed the process of this test all together. Associations would administer the test and literally the administrators would give the answers to the actual answer key and let people pass the test. Not just the answers, the answer key.

I realize they might use one or the other. But you have been on a crusade to call everyone a cheater and you do not know which states use the Part 1 Exam at all. I know of states that make up their own test as well. If someone uses the test to personally check their answers to this test, which is given out for study purposes only, you have no right to call them cheaters without know the process in which they use the test. I guess you have the right to say anything you like, but you would be wrong. But that has never stopped you before.

Peace

Well,
 

In Oregon, Part 1 is included in your packet as a "sample test" to practice for later testing.

We then take Part 2 (closed book) as our final exam. You must pass with a score of 75% to work varsity games -- an offical must score 90% or above to be able to work state playoff games.

Tee

Will you please learn to read...

Well it does not know and has not since they changed the Part 2 Exam administration.

***Yes, that is what "recent handbook" means. It was changed last year. I have the 2002 and 2003 books, you are wrong - it is in there.***


The test is not available on-line. Only the Part 1 Exam is available online. They might tell you what you received on the test, but you cannot take this test online.

***Reading 101 - the sites are available on line. I've already explained how it is scored.***


That is your opinion. That is not the shared opinion of many umpires or officials in many sports. Because what I read is not about what I see and how I have to react. If you feel it is, you have that right to fell that way. I disagree. What else is new?

***Nothing...you have been devoid of logic and fact since coming to this site. Many others have told you the same. These tests have been used for more years than you have been alive. If they had no merit, they would have gone away long ago. Speaking of going away...could you?***


You want to talk about cheating? Cheating was one of the reasons they changed the process of this test all together. Associations would administer the test and literally the administrators would give the answers to the actual answer key and let people pass the test. Not just the answers, the answer key.

***Wow, that is called libel. Do you have proof of these claims or are you lying again? Which groups and individuals provided these answer keys? If you want to disparage an entire state, call an attorney first. The reason it was changed may have done more with accountability than anything. Several years ago an entire packet of Part 2 tests went missing. This was a football exam and those guys were pissed. The IHSA took control of the situation and it just makes it tougher for guys like you to become Certified.***


I realize they might use one or the other. But you have been on a crusade to call everyone a cheater and you do not know which states use the Part 1 Exam at all. I know of states that make up their own test as well. If someone uses the test to personally check their answers to this test, which is given out for study purposes only, you have no right to call them cheaters without know the process in which they use the test. I guess you have the right to say anything you like, but you would be wrong. But that has never stopped you before.

***Wake up...when someone posts, "Hey, send me the answers, too." They aren't looking for anything more than to be able to cheat. I was very tempted to just make up 100 "ABCD" answers and email them along. That would serve them right.

Peace [/B][/QUOTE]

***Much like Falujjah, that offer/extol rings hollow.***

He tried to derail this discussionto no avail. Please let us know what your state is doing. Thank you to those who have contributed!

• Do you use the Part 1 test in your state?

• Do you use the Part 2 test?

• How are they used and if you don't use them, how do they
test the knowledge of the officials working?

You can only speak for yourself.
 

It is liable to state what people went through or their personal experiences. The person that got me into officiating took the Part 2 Exam the year before the IHSA changed the process. In two sports the association that was giving the test went over the exam so everyone could have the answers. It was a common practice and many changes were made to eliminate that practice. I am sure there were other reasons, but there is a reason there are no more officials that give the test. The school now control the test (AD's and Principles usually). The test is given on a specific day, not just a time period that is open for discussion. I think you need to find out what liable is. Because neither is my information false or purposely misleading. I am just telling you what many officials have told me and others. Matter of fact I have heard many official recently talk about how lucky they were to not have to go thru the same promotion process that we have today. Are they lying too?


So you know the reasons why everyone wants the answers? I know after I completed my test, I wanted the answers to see which one I got wrong. I recieved them and it was clear which answer was wrong and I was able to figure out why. Just because you cannot think of a reason, does not make what you are saying as the case. I know when I took the Part 2 Exam, I had people send me the answers after I took the test so I could find out if I passed. It mattered to me so I would know when to start having those promotion evaluations filled out. The IHSA did not tell you for a few weeks after you take the test and I wanted to know what I recieved and why I got certain answers wrong. I think you need to speak for yourself.

Peace

From Rut:
It is liable to state what people went through or their personal experiences. ...I think you need to find out what liable is. Because neither is my information false or purposely misleading. I am just telling you what many officials have told me and others. Matter of fact I have heard many official recently talk about how lucky they were to not have to go thru the same promotion process that we have today. Are they lying too?


Libel != liable
I can hardly stop laughing. You say that your information is not false or misleading. In libel cases, you would be asked to support your statement and prove it is accurate. Let me guess, you won’t name the association or person involved. Then that could be considered libelous to any group or organization that your friend is affiliated with, genius. Maybe they weren't cheating after all; they were just studying the answers prior to the test!!!

The promotion process in Illinois is not very different. You still have to take both tests and receive passing scores. You still have to have Certified officials and coaches support your bid to become Recognized or Certified. In years past, Certified officials were able to rank that official 1-5 and indicate any areas of deficiency. Now, you can only say, “Yes, he /she should be promoted.” or “No, he/she should not.” That is not progress, that is a step in the wrong direction.

Again, with the “many officials I’ve talked to” stuff. These guys cheated to pass and you support sharing answers on this and the basketball site. Times really haven’t changed in your ring of acquaintances.
••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••

From Rut:
So you know the reasons why everyone wants the answers? I know after I completed my test, I wanted the answers to see which one I got wrong. I recieved them and it was clear which answer was wrong and I was able to figure out why. Just because you cannot think of a reason, does not make what you are saying as the case. I know when I took the Part 2 Exam, I had people send me the answers after I took the test so I could find out if I passed. It mattered to me so I would know when to start having those promotion evaluations filled out. The IHSA did not tell you for a few weeks after you take the test and I wanted to know what I recieved and why I got certain answers wrong. I think you need to speak for yourself.

BTW: It’s i before e, except after c - check your “received” spellings, both of them!

I did not need the answers, since I scored a 100. However, many of my fellow umpires called to discuss questions that bothered them and asked my opinion. Since my friends know that I don’t like cheaters, they would never call and ask for the answers. I’m happy to teach or assist with a question or two, but don’t ask for all of them.

If you read the test and answer the questions you know, look up the ones you are unsure of and highlight those that may cause trouble, you’ll have a pretty good indication of which ones you got wrong. Then, you can come here and type that single question and receive dozens of replies. Now, you’ll know whether you were right or wrong.

I am only speaking for myself. Carefully, controlled, with reason and logic as my guides. You have taken this personally and that says more about your sense of worth than mine. Still puzzled by my resume? I believe you said that you could measure up against my accomplishments. Do you still think so? I’m sure that the rest of the Board would like to know.

In Indiana, part one is given to new officials applying for their license. Part II is used for those who apply for postseason, it is mailed out to you and you have a period of time to return it. We normally get together and go thru it together!

<i> Originally posted by WindyCityBlue </i>

Does your state mandate the NFHS Part 1 test in order for you to work high school baseball games?

Windy, IMO your question should be rephrased to say

"Does your association" mandate the NFHS Part 1 Test in order for you to work HS baseball games.

I live in NY where there are many associations and each one has their own requirements. However, it boils down to supply and demand meaning in general we have a shortage and it's not uncommon for the Modified Divisions to have only one umpire assigned.

So why we have to take the tests for the most part they are done in a group environment, meaning there are no real grading resctrictions UNLESS you are a "first time starter" in which case in order to gain INITIAL membership here in NY one needs a score of 85% or better to pass. There are however, 4-5 prep classes to aid you.

Pete Booth

Mick,

I'm fairly familiar with how to change a screen name. I'm not sure why you have chosen to respond with a name other than my screen name. One might construe this as an intent to intimidate, embarrass or besmirch. Someone else might advise a moderator to remain above the fray and restrain himself from doing something he might regret. Much like a big game, this is a crucial call and it is all yours.

[Edited by WindyCityBlue on Nov 17th, 2004 at 05:01 PM]

Oh, my!
Fixed it.
mick

Apology accepted...lame as it was.

That was not an apology.
I didn't know an apology was necessary.

Here is my apology:
<LI>Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! Won't happen again.

mick

"I didn't know..."

That was almost as good as the most famous "I don't know" of all time...Mr. Hand in Fast Times at Ridgemont High.

Of course you did.

Moderators of this board must discern when someone crosses the line, must refrain from petty swipes and must exercise good judgement.

I'm sure you have a mirror handy.

http://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/deadhorse.gif

Libel charges
 

Windy, in the U.S. it is the plaintiff charging libel or slander who must prove in court three things: (1) that statements by the defendant are false; (2) that the defendant published those statements knowing that they were false and with intent to damage the plaintiff; and (3) that the defendant has in fact been damaged by the false information. This heavy burden of proof is firmly on the plaintiff. In Britain, the reverse obtains: there, the accused must prove that the information is true. Maybe you should stick to umpiring instead of legal issues.

And thanks for catching folks' spelling errors. That's a crucial service you provide, and the site wouldn't be the same without it.

Typically, I prefer to find fault with the logic of his advice and opinions. Since that is usually absent from most of his posts, I was forced to perform a cyber-lobotomy on myself in order to communicate with him. Now that I have dumbed myself down again, I will be happy to answer any of your questions.

For the record, I have been both defendant and plaintiff in the aformentioned suits. I have counsel that is much better versed than yourself. When you own many properties, you're bound to have trouble with tenants and management companies. I find the company of court officials almost as tedious as your introspect.

I must have missed another memo. When exactly did you become the next Rut?