The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   FED test questions (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/41921-fed-test-questions.html)

Tim C Fri Feb 15, 2008 03:36pm

Gee,
 
MadCity:

I am sometimes amazed at your postings. This is one of them:

"Which state stuck in the 19th century is that?"

Oregon selects to offer Test 1 as a sample study guide for use by any association as they see fit. In Portland we use the test to help 1st and 2nd year student/umpires to get a basic gist of the rules. Others of us, mostly vets, use the test for adult conversation fodder and humor.

Oregon then moves to Test 2. The Oregon School Activities Association requires all varsity level umpires to take the test closed book. A score of 75 is necessary to work varsity games during the regular season. A score of 90 is required for any umpire to work ANY level playoff game.

I am guess that you would consider us 19th Century in your all-encompassing statement. We feel it is a good gauge of basic rules knowledge.

You can also follow this link to the article that was published about recruiting, training and retaining officials:

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2007/10/how_...officials.aspx

This article will help you see how one state (closely affiliated with the NFHS) uses testing to ensure that officials stay current with continuing education.

Regards,

Tim Christensen

Publication Committee Memeber
National Federation of State High Schools

High School Today

UmpJM Fri Feb 15, 2008 04:02pm

Tim C.,

I believe the MadCityRef was ridiculing the notion that passing a test ONE TIME provided a LIFETIME qualification to umpire, rather than the notion that repeated testing was a good idea.

I would guess that you and he are in violent agreement that an umpire should be required to regularly demonstrate his mastery of the rules over time.

JM

bobbybanaduck Fri Feb 15, 2008 04:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)
bobby,

Then I take it you haven't seen...



All kinds of interesting stuff in the FED rules.

JM

no sir. massachusetts doesn't do FED, and neither do i.

MadCityRef Sat Feb 16, 2008 03:22am

Quote:

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)
Tim C.,

I believe the MadCityRef was ridiculing the notion that passing a test ONE TIME provided a LIFETIME qualification to umpire, rather than the notion that repeated testing was a good idea.

I would guess that you and he are in violent agreement that an umpire should be required to regularly demonstrate his mastery of the rules over time.

JM

Yeah, Timmy don't like me. :(
Like all Axemen, I Strive for Excellence. ;) Next stop, Altoona!! :D

Wisconsin requires part 2 and a mechanics test if you're a playoff eligible.

Illinois requires part 2 when trying for elevation (promotion), and mechanics only in football, and only once, to Certified (highest of three levels.)

IL: I would like to see oldsters take the part 2 and mechs. regularly, say every three years. IHSA is now requiring a clinic every year to keep one's playoff points. This is good, but most clinics teach at maintaining the current level without challenging officials to get better.

But then, just because you can pass a test doesn't mean you're any good, which I prove constantly. :rolleyes:

Tim C Sat Feb 16, 2008 09:14am

"Yeah, Timmy don't like me."

Is that the best you got?

Sad.

jkumpire Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:29am

I Must Protest
 
The trend looks like that more and more state organizations will mandate testing for all umpires every year.

However, I live in a state that does not have mandatory testing, and I think that is the better alternative. I really dislike testing yearly for several reasons

First, getting 75 or 80 on the FED test is rally not that tough. A Smitty who had 1 year of experience 10 times can get a minimum score to do games.

Second, testing is a governmental device to try and enforce certain outcomes, and so the test determines what is important to know to do the job. Organizations use tests as tools to measure competency, and most of the time it is a very inaccurate measure. Okay, so how many uniform questions matter, and how many field questions matter for umpires who work HS baseball? So, team A is in illegal uniforms playing Team B on a non-regulation field. Does that matter to me as the UIC? No!!! Yes, I need to to sent a report to the state association, but what will happen after my report gets there?

Now Team A and Team B in the same situation are playing, and the BU kicks two big judgment calls at 2B, and calls a balk when there was nothing there. That is what matters, field competence. No test will help with judgment, or seeing situations and responding to them.

Third, the Fed test is a fairly well-done test. Under the constraints FED works in, I would defy anyone (including me since I am not a fan of the test) to find a better alternative for FED to use. My guess is that a 76 question test will get the job done if it is all T/F. But FED will never run one.

Ultimately, it is an internal matter. Good umpires become good umpires because they are internally motivated to study, learn, communicate with other umpires and give 100% effort on the field, and just as much off the field. Testing is for most of us, a waste of time.

Now, what would be a good test:

FED solicits game film from all over the country, or puts people in real world rule situations, videos them, then passes out a test saying: "What happened in this case, and why?" Or, "What is the correct call here, and why?" Or, "How do you as the UIC or Bu respond to this play situation?"

As I am sure you can tell there are several problems already. First, how much tape is needed to get this test set up? Two, who grades the responses, and how do you test people who don't write well? Three, what is passing? If I get 3/4 of a question right, do I miss it?

That is a better test than the current one.

Finally, I would like to see FED do questions like this once in a while.
"F1 stand on the pitchers plate in the wind-up position, both hands at his side. He then goes to his mouth. You then have:"
A. Illegal pitch
B. illegal pitch, or balk with runners on base
C. Nothing
D. Call time and start all over again

johnnyg08 Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:33am

C

jkumpire Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:45am

Johnny
 
You Sure?

dash_riprock Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:12pm

A

Tim C Sat Feb 16, 2008 01:27pm

Mmmmmm!
 
Johnny said:

"C"


Dash said:

"A"


Would you like some parting gifts?

Refer to 2008 Case Book play:

6.2.1 Situation B:

Ruling "(b) the pitcher has balked and R1 is awarded second base."

Regards,

dash_riprock Sat Feb 16, 2008 02:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim C
Johnny said:

"C"


Dash said:

"A"


Would you like some parting gifts?

Refer to 2008 Case Book play:

6.2.1 Situation B:

Ruling "(b) the pitcher has balked and R1 is awarded second base."

Regards,

6.2.1 Situation B (b) is from the set position. jkumpire's question (a good one) is from the windup. You can have my parting gifts.

johnnyg08 Sat Feb 16, 2008 02:17pm

But doesn't it have to simulate the beginning of the pitching motion? Or is that just in the OBR rule set?

dash_riprock Sat Feb 16, 2008 02:21pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyg08
But doesn't it have to simulate the beginning of the pitching motion? Or is that just in the OBR rule set?

The question said F1 was in the windup with both hands at his sides. From this position, moving one arm does not commit him to pitch. Going to the mouth on the rubber is an illegal pitch (ball), but he has not balked.

johnnyg08 Sat Feb 16, 2008 02:23pm

that's what I'm saying...is the FED rule different? By the looks of it...yes.

dash_riprock Sat Feb 16, 2008 03:20pm

The ball is immediately dead in FED only.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:43am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1