85% missed this one
 

85% of our membership missed this True/False question on the Fed Test:

If a fair batted ball is caught, a runner shall touch his base after the batted ball has been caught by a fielder.

The 85% said "true".

What do you all think?

I think that if the question said "touched" instead of "caught, the answer would be true.

Tim.

I agree with Tim on the answer.
I believe that the question is pure bull$hit for wording the way they did. It is not even a decent "trick question". I am getting tired of this kind of crap on FED tests. It's bad enough to "have to pass these test so you can work the season" but to have this bull$hit on the tests is becoming a joke. And there is no convincing me that this is a way to make you think - it's just bull$hit!
:mad::mad::mad:

Got together on Monday evening this week with a couple of other guys from my association to review the FED test over a few cold ones.

I had false for this question & they both had true. After reading the rule book, they concurred that the correct answer was false.

Didn't strike me as a poor question.

JM

I first thought "true" - but this is essentially the exact verbiage from the rule book with "touched" changed to "caught."

Didn't seem like a trick question to me. Simply testing the knowledge of the rules verbiage.

"If a fair or foul batted ball is caught, other than a foul tip, each base runner shall touch his base after the batted ball has been touched by a fielder." - my emphasis - Rule 8-2-4

I agree with Tim and thought of touch vs. catch as soon as I read the question.

This is not a trick question at all. It is a basic rule. It is not that uncommon to see a juggled catch, or even a touch by one fielder followed by a catch by another. 85% missing it doesn't speak well of the class.

The whole test process is a joke. Take it closed book, with someone watching for cheats, and make the score count for something.

What, are we sad we didn't get 100?

D

85% can't be wrong
 

To emphasize first touched by suggesting a ball that is juggled and then caught, or first touched and then caught by another player would be fair. This is a BS question because almost all fly balls are first touched immediately when caught. The two events occur simultaneously as suggested by 85% of the umpires. It appears that 15% of the readers failed to realize this possible scenario. ;)

SAUmp,

Since part of the requirement for a legal catch is to demonstrate voluntary & intentional release, I would say that it is by definition impossible for the catch and the first touch to occur simultaneously.

JM

As I just said in the other thread, this question is straight from the rule book. How can you complain when the question is taken straight from the book?

The question and the book both say "batted ball is caught, a runner shall touch his base after the batted ball has _______ a fielder"

In the question the blank is "been caught by" and in the book it is "touched".

Now how is that a joke? Could the question be any more straightforward?

For my certification I took a class on how to write tests.

The worst kind of test for testing true knowledge is the true/false test.

This kind of question is why.

Rita

True.

:D

These are not questions. These are true/false statements. If they were questions they would have a question mark at the end of the sentence.

Jesus, Alou...........:rolleyes:

As one member in our association argued in defense of his "true" answer (and he argued a lot more eloquently than I can write):

He said look at the meat of the question: "a runner shall touch his base after the batted ball has been caught by a fielder".

He said that is true.

When told by another association member that the answer is "false" because a runner must touch a base after the ball has been TOUCHED by a fielder, he said, "that's not what the question is asking. A runner does not have to re-touch his base after it is touched, he only has to re-touch if it is caught. Meaning, that if the ball is touched by a fielder and then dropped, the runner is not liable to be put out for failing to re-touch. It is the act of the fielder making a legal catch that imposes upon the runner the requirement to retouch his base.

"Thus, a runner shall touch his base after the batted ball has been caught by a fielder is true, because if the fielder does not catch the ball there cannot be a requirement to retouch, period."

However, I also see the other side. The question says "AFTER the batted ball has been caught..." and that IS false if you look at it from the point of view that the runner does not have to wait on the bag until, as JM points out, the fielder completes his catch with a voluntary release.

This is a BS question. As I said, 85% of our association got it wrong. Despite that, our association had the highest average grade of any association in the Palmetto State with an average score of 92 (we have 50+ members)...so, some of our guys know how to take this test (but apparently not this question).

Oh well.

better question
 

well said, lawump.

this is a very poor question if they truly wanted to test your ability to apply this rule.

a similar, but fair question might be...

Fly ball to F7. R3 is tagging at 3rd. R3 must wait until the ball is caught by F7 before tagging up and heading home. Tor F?

To those who know the rule, this is obviously false. This type of question still tests your knowledge of "caught" vs. "touched" but it gives a reasonable chance to answer it correctly if you are familiar with the rule.

[QUOTE]I agree that the question is worded poorly, however, sometimes we read too much into it. The ball was not dropped it was ALREADY CAUGHT Here is the question again


The ball has been caught - Premise one

Now read the second part a runner shall touch his base after the batted ball has been caught by a fielder

Bad wording I agree because as others mentioned the word "touched" should have been used not caught because the ball was Already caught.

Bad wording but Sometimes I think we are all guilty of reading too much into it.

There are 100 questions and you can pass with an 85. it's inevitable that a few of them are "shaky" but there is "wiggle room" to pass the test. Not all 100 questions are written this way.

Pete Booth

ME ! Me ! Me! Call on ME, Teach!!

They din't read the rule book? :p

I think if the question had said "cat" instead of "runner" the answer would be false. :rolleyes:

I don't think it's BS question at all...the rule doesn't say caught, it says touched...don't put your own words into the question and you'd get it right. 85% getting it wrong is a little scary...

I think the test should remain open book...isn't the objective to go through the rule book and learn the rules...that's the objective...not who can memorize the rules.

A test isn't supposed to teach you the subject matter, it is supposed to "test" your knowledge of the subject matter. I thought it was a good thing for umpires to have the rules memorized?

I think memorizing stuff doesn't equal learning the rules...it just proves that you have a black and white memory of the rule book...that doens't equal a good umpire...sure it helps, but if you were certifying umpires wouldn't you want everybody to pass/ace the test because they looked up the rules and did the test...after all, this is a hobby for many of us. It's not our job. Keep the test open book...whether the test is open book or closed book, you're still testing knowledge. The only difference is that if you're testing open book, you're not testing memory. Just because I look up a rule in the off season or in between games...doesn't make me a better or worse umpire...under your logic, I should memorize the rules one time, then never open up the rule book again. Under this path, it continually promotes officials to open up and continually study the rules. Many will say that in order to be a great umpire, one should study the rules on a "daily" basis. Because one does that on a daily basis is that suggesting that you know the rules better than me because you have them memorized, and don't study the rule book...because you have it memorized?

I never said it made a good umpire, though rules knowledge is obviously a very important component in the make up of a good umpire. Of course rote memorization doesn't equal knowing what the rules mean and how to apply them but a properly written test can be a good indicator of such.

No I wouldn't. Different sport but my football association's tests are all closed book and we are expected to study for them ahead of time. I would not want my officials to learn from taking a test that is supposed to measure your rules knowledge. That is what practice tests and study groups are for. An open book test might be testing knowledge....or it might be testing how well somebody can look a rule up. The latter doesn't help you much when you're on the field in the middle of a knotty problem.

If you accept money to umpire, it is a job. Granted, its a job we all enjoy and it probably isn't your primary source of income, but it is still a job.

Those are a lot of words you've put in my mouth. I've never advocated reading the rules once and never again.

I agree with that approach, but during the test is not the time to be doing that.

"Good at looking up rules" could equal "good at taking tests" neither equal whether or not you're a good umpire or not. "Great at taking tests" could equal "horrible umpire"

So I say...keep it open book and promote the fact that people open up the book and take the test. Not everybody will get together to form study groups (it is a good idea though), not everybody will take practice tests (it's not the LSAT), do practice tests make you a better umpire or does it make you a better test taker? I think we're going to continue to split hairs here...want to call a truce?

They are tools to help learn and retain the rules. I didn't know practice tests were limited to school entrance exams.

I suppose a test where everybody is intended to pass is a good if you're not concerned about testing actual knowledge.

When I used to work softball, we had an open book ASA test. This seemed to allow a lot of warm bodies in that read the rules once or twice but never really learned them. Once we went to a closed book test, a lot of those people either went away or had to learn the rules better. I was perfectly happy with this because I do NOT like working with people that don't know the rules.

It's a slow Friday at work but I'm tired of this discussion going in circles so I'm fine with that.

I wish all rules "discussions" on the field could end like that!

I'm in for the truce...just for the record, I wasn't arguing one side or the other (hell, I haven't even stated what I answered) I was just seeking feedback from this esteemed forum (in my first post) and then giving to you all what was said by a member of my association at our post-test meeting.

I could give a darn, because I know every varsity umpire in my association will get this call correct on the field.

My apologies for hijacking your thread lawump. :o

What he said makes sense, except he did not analyze the entire question. It says "If a fair batted ball is caught, a runner shall touch his base after the batted ball has been caught by a fielder."

All the arguing about what happened if the fielder touches the ball but doesn't catch it does not matter as the question clearly states that the ball was caught.

The question has 2 parts:

1. If a fair batted ball is caught
2. the runner shall retouch his base after the ball is caught.

One has to look at both parts in order to understand the question. The guy in your association only looked at the second part.

Show him 8-2-4. It's pretty straight forward. The test is not worded lilke the book, making the test statement incorrect.

LDUB is right, he's only debating half of the statement.

It's called a test question regardless. And it's still a poor way to test true working knowledge.

Rita

Which is ultimately the point. Fed tests don't.

What if it's a ground ball? You never said it was a fly ball.

Maybe True or False
 

Please flip a ball up in the air and catch it and then let me know if the catch doesn't immediately take place up on first touch, second touch or third touch. Gloves are designed to secure posession upon first touch.

"If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught."

The runner is not obligated to wait that long. He can leave the base as soon as the catch was made. Or should I say, before the fielder can legally demonstrate voluntary & intentional release.

Note: This situation doen't include rare events such as dropping the ball before securing posession, juggling a catch, or tipping the ball from one glove into another.

Really? I'm not sure where that's written...........


Tim.

Dependent Clause
 

This situation includes rare events such as dropping the ball before securing posession, juggling a catch, or tipping the ball from one glove into another.

A dependent statement may misrepresent other situations when the independent condition is not present. This valid point is made on behalf of 85% of the umpires who failed to connect "touch" within the proper independent statement. This dependent clause only makes sense when the independent statement is included within such a question. Thus, whoever wrote the BS question misled the majority of the umpires who chose the wrong initial independent condition.

True
 

Written again and again.

Rule 7.08 - Any runner is out when -
(d) failing to retouch the base after a fair or foul fly ball is legally caught before that runner or the base is legally tagged by a fielder. ... This is an appeal play

Mr. Umpire, I appeal to your best judgment, that the answer is actually true, as witnessed by 85% of the umpires.

Well, since you're going to throw an OBR rule cite into a FED thread (hey, that rhymes!), I'll help you out..........


Official Notes - Case Book - Comments: A catch is legal if the ball is finally held by any fielder, even though juggled, or held by another fielder before it touches the ground.

Runners may leave their bases the instant the first fielder touches the ball.

A fielder may reach over a fence, railing, rope or other line of demarcation to make a catch. He may jump on top of a railing, or canvas that may be in foul ground. No interference should be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. If a fielder, attempting a catch at the edge of the dugout, is "held up" and kept from an apparent fall by a player or players of either team and the catch is made, it shall be allowed.



Tim.

"Catch" implies that the ball was both batted and airbourne. Read the definition of "catch" (2-9-1).

Touch-Catch vs Leave-Touch?
 

Option A: Runner shall re-touch his base after fielder catches the ball. True
Option B: Runner may leave his base the instant fielder first touches the ball. True

OP discusses option A, not option B, answer is true as defined in OBR 7.08D.

Where can I find 7.08(d) in the FED rules book?

8.2 PENALTY (ART. 1-5) Page 49 of the rule book.

~Cripes~
 

"Originally Posted by SAump

The legal requirement to demonstrate voluntary and intentional release requires another hand to enter the glove to remove the ball shortly after the catch has already been made."


There is no such rule or interpretation under any code and in any official document.

This statement is not only inaccurate it is simply made up balderdash.

Regards,

My question to you SAump...have you ever played baseball...I don't care how the glove was designed...the first touch versus "catch" rule is there for a very good reason.

Think about it...if it truly was a "catch" rule, coaches would be coaching thier kids to bobble the ball all the way into the infield to prevent any type of tag-up by the offense...that's why the rule is there...to protect the integrity of the game...and probably a few other reasons

Moot point
 

"The legal requirement to demonstrate voluntary and intentional release requires another hand to enter the glove to remove the ball shortly after the catch has already been made."

It has been documented in this thread that VaIR is necessary to complete a legal catch.
What am I missing?

The release has to be voluntary and intentional, if there is a release. Obtaining secure possession doesn't necessarily entail a release of the ball, and a voluntary release doesn't necessarily entail another hand in the glove.

Think about it
 

What if first touch is a catch, ie. secure possession?

Does the FED question and rule 8-4-2 imply that a catch is not a secure grip of the baseball upon first touch? Think about it. A catch is not a catch...

As for the rest of your logic, balderdash.

So, if an outfielder catches a fly ball for the third out, jogs to the infield and drops the ball on the mound from his glove, you don't have voluntary release?


Tim.

The length from behind 2B, where many CF in LL under 11 catch fly balls, to the mound, is so short that it is very possible that control was not maintained.

No catch.

I haven't worked an 11U game in quite some time, but I'd imagine that this situation at that level would allow the fielder at least several steps after catching the ball before he reached the mound. Have you had a protest lodged for kicking this call?


Tim.

Enuf
 

Again, a fielder may flip the ball out of his glove.

About that question
 

While I realize that rule differences exist among various levels of baseball, I would not qualify this question as an actual rule difference.
I argue that the moment a first fielder touches the ball usually takes place at the same time the ball was caught, not juggled, nor tipped.
Now, if we decide that a catch is not possible upon first touch, I suppose there is some other possible rule modification in order here.
If there is nothing in the question to indicate a ball is juggled or tipped, then a runner may leave as soon as the ball is caught.

I understand that the FED rule requires a runner touch the base after the fly ball is first touched by a fielder.
Somebody at the FED level is trying very hard to make their rule interpretation look different too.
I agree that FED 8-4-2 interpretation is different than OBR 7.08d in a literal sense.
But from what I have retouched upon so far; it aint so, Joe.

The rule is the same in all codes -- a runner can leave when the ball is first touched.

A catch happens (is confirmed) some discernable time after the ball is touched. Even on a liner to F6, I'd guess that it's .5 seconds or so.

While I have probably been as guilty as anyone in terms of "bashing" the FED test (and, by implication, those responsible for producing it), I would like to offer the following....

Writing an effective test is a difficult thing to do.

In my opinion, both the scope (breadth of material addressed, diversity and size of the test-taking population, administrive requirements) and purpose(es) of the FED Part 1 Baseball test increase the degree of difficulty. While I don't "know" this to be the case, I believe that the purposes of the FED exam include trying to insure a minimum level of rules competency among FED-licensed officials, encouraging officials to read/review the published rules materials, and calling attention to the rules which have been revised since the previous year.

While it is easy to find flaws, all in all, I believe they do a decent job of achieving their aims.

On to the question at hand - specifically, Q83.

It seems that the primary objection to this question is that a person could know the rule (that a runner may meet his retouch obligation as soon as the first fielder makes the first touch of the ball, rather than having to wait until a legal catch is "proved") and still answer the question incorrectly.

I would agree.

lawump asserted that 85% of the members of his association answered the question incorrectly. I would be willing to bet that at least half of that 85% understood the rule. (Of course, I believe that lawump is from the Palmetto State, where they still have umps call runners out for appealable baserunning infractions without appeal - so I might be optimistic with that estimate...;) )

On the other hand, if you DON'T know the rule (that the runner may leave on the first touch), you will ALWAYS answer this question incorrectly. So, it's possible that 42.5% of lawump's assoc. didn't understand this point in the rules.

In some ways, this question is testing the person's test-taking skills in addition to his rules knowledge. If you actually go and read the rule, the test answer becomes obvious.

Now I don't believe test-taking skills contribute in any way to an umpire's competency. However, I believe an in-depth understanding of the rules and their application, even some things that are kind of "technical", does contribute to an umpire's overall competency.

If you can't pass this test, you probably shouldn't be umpiring.

If it upsets you to get a question marked wrong, well, then RTFM. ALL the answers are in the book(s), and it's an "open book" test. A couple of "discrepancies" in the answer key seem to appear every year. Mildly annoying, but it's not worth worrying about.

Those are my thoughts.

JM

Couple of brief thoughts:

More than 1/2 of the 85% that missed this question know this rule. We had a bunch of Division 1 umpires missing this...and they all know it.

Our test is "closed book".

As you implired, for the vast majority, this was an "annoyance" as our association's average score was 92...by far, the highest in SC.

And yes, we still do not have "appeals" in South Carolina high school baseball. (Well, except for checked swings that were adjudged to be a ball by the plate umpire.).

As a result, I'm still waiting for this following play to happen to one of us (SC umpires) in a game:

R1, hit-and-run, BR smokes it to the gap in right-center. R1 puts his head down and is well on his way to third...when F8 makes an unbelievable catch. F8 then fires to F3 to double-off R1, only with F8's adrenaline flowing after the great catch, he sails the throw into DBT. At the moment the ball goes into DBT, R1 is between second and third.

If you read and understand FED Rule 8...and then realize that we have no appeal play in SC...you will understand the craphouse that the umpires in this game are going to have.

It will happen someday, sometime. It has happened to several of our association members in non-high school games....eventually it will happen in high school.

Don't know what the aims are of your local FED org but in Atlanta it's get some fukkers on the field. The FED test is open book, test answers in hand.

How would you know? You haven't called baby ball in decades. :rolleyes:

So like IU, you're inconclusive to present LL U12. OK, what do you work then? It's a mystery to us on the forum.

Half of the questions on the test are based on a direct quotation of the rule. This is about as straight forward a question as possible. For anybody to suggest this question is True better go back and read the entire rule book. The basic reason the answer is false is that caught only describes the final result, not the method to the final result. If the guy bobbles it 10 times before finally securing it for a catch, a runner tagging up from first could probably make it around the bases by the time the fielder finally secures it and meeting the requirements for a catch. If you say catch is the requirement, a fielder could bobble the ball all the way into the infield and a runner could never advance. That's why they write the questions the way they do - to make sure you read and understand the question and apply the rules properly.

SAC Fly Situation
 

The object of the game is for the defense to catch the ball and throw the runner out.
1) a fielder sometimes doesn't make a catch right away.
2) a fielder may bobble the ball to keep a runner from advancing.
3) a runner has to wait until the ball was "finally" caught.

When I first saw this question, I thought, "I'll bet there will be a number of umpires answer this without thinking and miss it."

I was right. This is straight out of the rule book...no tricks intended or offered. No offense, but the only reason for missing it is thinking that it's too easy to have to think about. About 5% missed it in my group.

Hey English majors
 

Compare the FED rulebook,
with the question,
Note, the ball has been caught. Caught is past tense. The action has taken place.

Have you seen the NCAA compromise between FED types and OBR types? ;)

Warning:
 

The events in this post did not take place.
Our top dog talked about the situation during our pre-test discussion.
He recognized that he didn't have time to argue with 85% of the group.
He acknowledged that TRUE was the correct answer on the ballfield.
He told everyone to answer false on the test.
He doesn't care for the FED tactic either.
He completely agrees with post #3.
This may occur again before the exam takes place next year.
Two people in our association missed the question.
They were not paying attention.

Amazing
 

I was discussing the test with a high school umpire (and college this year) and mentioned that he needed to watch out for this question. I told him the question and he said it was true. I said that they could leave when the ball was touched. He told me they didn't have to tag up at all if it were juggled. I said they did.

He says, "That's Little League" I told him it was all codes. Then he seeks confirmation from another high school umpire. That umpire also agreed with him that the runner did not need to tag up if the ball were juggled.

He finally told me to email him the rule. I sent him for OBR, FED, and NCAA.

Sigh.

Umpire #2--three years, training with local association

Umpire #1--five years, training with local association

Me--10 years. Read the OBR straight through four times before starting. Western Region Little League umpire school, weeklong. Trained two years with NBUA in Seattle. Yearly training with District 1 Little League, which is better than the NBUA training. UIC and clinician for local league. Ask me a rules question, I can probably tell you rule number and maybe even whether it's on the right or left page of the book.

And they know this.

But hell what do I know.

Rita

8.2.4. Sorry, you know that.

That would be casebook. (The 2002 casebook doesn't have anything there.)

The rule is 8-2-4.

But I'm sure you knew that.

Rita

They've put out six newer casebooks since then.

But I'm sure you knew that.:D

:D Why yes, I do. But I don't do high school ball. I had a set when my son was playing. That was 2002.

Rita:p

Somewhere in this sentence is a punchline just dying to be posted........;)