NCAA batting out of order?

[ctblu40]

I just finished taking the NCAA preseason rules test online and I'm a little confused now. Here's the question:

QUESTION:
B5 bats in place of the proper batter B4 and grounds out to end the top of the sixth inning. The bottom of the sixth inning is then completed. While the home team is warming up and before the start of the top of the next inning, the home team coach appeals that B5 batted out of turn.

ANSWER:
A. The umpire should not uphold the appeal.
B. The umpire should uphold the appeal.

I answered "A" but was incorrect. Here's the rules link provided as an explaination:

Rule 7: Batting
Section 11-a: When Batter or Batter-Runner Is Out

A batter is out when:

On appeal by the opposing team, the individual fails to bat in the proper turn and another batter completes a time at bat in that place.

(2) If the improper batter becomes a base runner or is put out and an appeal is made to the umpire-in-chief before a pitch to the next batter of either team, or a play or attempted play, the proper batter is declared out and all runners return to bases held before action by the improper batter. However, any advances by a runner(s), (e.g., stolen base, balk, wild pitch, passed ball) while the improper batter is at bat are legal. If the proper batter is declared out, the next person in the lineup shall be the batter.

(3) If a proper appeal is not made, the improper batter becomes the proper batter and the results of the time at bat become official.

(4) When the action of the improper batter becomes official, the batting order resumes with the following batter.

A.R. The umpires, official scorer or public-address announcer shall not call attention to the improper batter. If this occurs, the umpire-in-chief shall warn the official scorer and/or the public-address announcer that on the next infraction the offending person will be removed from the position.

What am I missing here? Since the appeal wasn't made before the next pitch, play or attempted play, why should the umpire uphold the appeal?

[tibear]

Not only did a pitch, play or attempted play take place but an entire half inning!!!

I would say the question is wrong. You can't go back an entire half-inning.

I guess the testers are saying that there was no pitch, play or attempted play during the visitors "at bat" essentially ignoring the home teams at bat.

I would refuse the appeal and call B6 to the plate.

[Dave Hensley]

I agree this must simply be an error on the exam. That's a classic "trick" question on OBR-based exams, because not many remember the "on either team" reference with respect to the "pitch, play or attempted play" requirement. I don't know NCAA rules well, but that phrase "on either team" is right there in the rule you quoted, so the only logical conclusion is that the test is in error.

[RPatrino]

Maybe I mis-read the question, but aren't the players here warming up between innings? As I read the situation: no pitch, play or attempted play has been made by either team. The action of the illegal batter has not been made legal yet.

So, why uphold the appeal? Because it effects the batting order. B4 is called out for the third out and B5 becomes the legal batter and leads off.

Was this too easy or am I missing something obvious?

[greymule]

Was this too easy or am I missing something obvious?

The latter. There was a pitch to the other team. Therefore, the appeal was not proper. It was not made "before a pitch to the next batter of either team."

Save your copy of the test, ctblu40, preferably sealed in acid-free plastic. It may well contain the first known example of an error on a rules test.

[RPatrino]

As I read the question again, I noticed that the question referenced a complete half inning had passed. A trick question.....shame..shame....

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

As I read the question again, I noticed that the question referenced a complete half inning had passed. A trick question.....shame..shame....

That's why I'm confused. The Batting out of order happened when B5 bats in place of B4. He grounds out and thus ends the top of the sixth. The question then states that "The bottom of the sixth inning is then completed. While the home team is warming up and before the start of the top of the next inning, the home team coach appeals that B5 batted out of turn."

So a whole half inning is completed. How do you as the UIC allow the coach to appeal this?

If this situation happened to me, I would not allow the appeal, but if the coach wants to protest the game, I would note it and make sure the official scorer is aware of the protest and continue the game.

I don't have the 2007 NCAA book yet, was there a change to the appeal rule?

[greymule]

Maybe there's a further trick to this question. All it says is, "The bottom of the sixth inning is then completed." But it doesn't stipulate how.

Perhaps no pitch was thrown in the bottom of the inning. Maybe all three outs resulted from batters who refused to enter the batter's box.

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by greymule

Maybe there's a further trick to this question. All it says is, "The bottom of the sixth inning is then completed." But it doesn't stipulate how.

Perhaps no pitch was thrown in the bottom of the inning. Maybe all three outs resulted from batters who refused to enter the batter's box.

I guess that's a possibility but...

What exactly is the test writer trying to test here? If he's testing my ability to rule on baseball situations, he has lost.
If he's testing my ability to think outside the box, I suppose he has won.

[greymule]

I'm pulling your leg, of course, ctblu40.

Even Educational Testing Service, which every year spends millions of dollars to develop just the SAT verbal, gets caught on a question for which there are actually two correct or even no correct answers. I admit they seldom make mistakes as obvious as the one you cited from the NCAA test, but they still make them.

A couple of years ago, ETS had to revise some PSAT scores because it had erroneously included the following sentence as a grammatically correct example:

Toni Morrison's genius enables her to create novels that arise from and express the injustices African Americans have endured.

(Anyone know why this sentence is NOT grammatically correct? Only one person contested the question, but that person had a valid point.)

Most of us take tests on certain codes every year, and there are inevitably several questions on each test that someone with a real stake in a score could contest and win. We often find ourselves asking, "Is this a trick question of some kind, or are they simply trying to remind us of a particular interpretation but didn't take much care in writing the question?"

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by greymule

A couple of years ago, ETS had to revise some PSAT scores because it had erroneously included the following sentence as a grammatically correct example:

Toni Morrison's genius enables her to create novels that arise from and express the injustices African Americans have endured.

(Anyone know why this sentence is NOT grammatically correct? Only one person contested the question, but that person had a valid point.)

Yes, unless you are listing things, such as apples and oranges, a comma is to be placed prior to conjunctions such as, but not limited to, "and," and "but." So there should be a comma placed between "from" and "and." Notice that no comma was required between "from" and "and" in my sentence.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Yes, unless you are listing things, such as apples and oranges, a comma is to be placed prior to conjunctions such as, but not limited to, "and," and "but." So there should be a comma placed between "from" and "and." Notice that no comma was required between "from" and "and" in my sentence.

BZZZZZT! Sorry. Thanks for playing.

But, nice try.

Actually, under common usage, there really is not an error in the sentence. However, picking nits to the point of making language "un-understandable" (sic), the antecedent of "her" is not "Toni Morrison." The antecedent is"Toni Morrison's genius."

Therefore, the sentence technically should read "Toni Morrison's genius enables IT to create novels..."

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by GarthB

BZZZZZT! Sorry. Thanks for playing.

But, nice try.

Actually, under common usage, there really is not an error in the sentence. However, picking nits to the point of making language "un-understandable" (sic), the antecedent of "her" is not "Toni Morrison." The antecedent is"Toni Morrison's genius."

Therefore, the sentence technically should read "Toni Morrison's genius enables IT to create novels..."

I agree with your first point, that there's really nothing wrong with the sentence as written. It's kind of a run-on sentence, and therefore poorly structured but I detect no actual grammatical error.

I disagree that it is Toni's genius that is creating the novels. Toni creates the novels; her genius enables her to. I don't think that's what greymule is going to say is the error.

But it's definitely not SDS's desire to litter the sentence with superfluous commas, either.

Edited to add:
I've discovered that Garth's answer (that "her" is the error) is indeed the reason the PSAT people changed their minds and agreed the sentence was flawed. I still disagree, but I'm no English teacher; merely an honors English graduate.

[RPatrino]

Now I have a question. I have been reading a book, whose author makes liberal use of the colon: is this proper?

[D-Man]

Could ensuring the correct proper batter comes to bat be construed as upholding the appeal? I've got a couple NCAA questions to "contest" but on this one aren't there 3 ways to uphold a BOO appeal?

1. If the IP is not out or on base, replace with PB and assume IP's count.

2. IP is out or on base. BOO is discovered BEFORE the next pitch by either team. PB is out (cancel advnaced caused by IP's actions as a batter). Next batter is the name following PB.

3. After a pitch is thrown by either team, IP becomes legalized. Next batter is the name that follows newly legalized IP.

Can each of these three options be considered accepting (or honoring) the BOO appeal?

just a thought...

D