|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
[QUOTE=UmpJM (nee CoachJM);663938]
Quote:
Why! Because U1 has NO business coming to U3 in the first place unless U3 requests his help. If an umpire calls "anything" no other umpire should even get involved UNLESS the manager utters "protest" or the umpire making the call asks for assistance. Here we had U3 calling balk, therefore, U1 should keep his mouth shut UNLESS as mentioned U3 asks for his assistance. IMO, that's why A fits. Pete Booth
__________________
Peter M. Booth |
|
|||
As for the balk scenario...this isn't a legal do over. U3 has to eat his call. After reading it again, I didn't do the test, but reading all of the options, I would've put "A." This isn't one that you can really fix. The CCA manual says something about the fact that changing the call would cause more problems so they eat this one.
At least I think it was CCA...but it might have been the NCAA memorandum on Appendix E that was published after an NCAA conference.
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again Last edited by johnnyg08; Tue Feb 23, 2010 at 11:22pm. Reason: wrong scenario |
|
|||
Two outta three ain't bad...unless the part you missed is the third one.
|
|
|||
[QUOTE=PeteBooth;664213]
Quote:
|
|
|||
Bunt Pop-up Where?
Had to be there. The runner is only protected in the vicinity of the batter's box. He is not expected to have eyes in the back of his head or anticipate the catcher's movement from behind. However, it is a totally different matter if the BR is running into the play.
I suspect that interfering with a batted ball is grounds for a DP here. If the catcher is about to make a play and the runner is running into his arm/glove. I would rule interference based on the judgment that the runner is allowed to avoid a fielder making a play on a batted ball.
__________________
SAump |
|
|||
Thats not a balk?
U1 had no business asking, but U2 had no business calling that a balk. A throw to an unoccupied base w/ R1 leading off 1B is a balk. But the second R1 turned and ran toward the unoccupied base legalized the throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making a play. R1 is out. I would not reverse the expected outcome of a properly executed defensive gem unless I was absolutely sure that R1 had successfully stolen 2B. From the OP, in my judgement R1 was a sitting duck and the play shall stand.
Now I would like to know how the guy who incorrectly called a balk is going to enforce the one base awards after being set straight by U1? This would be especially difficult if the pitcher made no motion associated with the delivery of a pitch, ala start and stop.
__________________
SAump |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NCAA Rule change? - Question #57 NCAA Test | ljudge | Football | 2 | Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:21am |
FED test questions | bossman72 | Baseball | 68 | Sun Mar 30, 2008 06:02pm |
Test Questions-NF | devdog69 | Volleyball | 19 | Wed Aug 24, 2005 01:07pm |
NCAA Test questions | jjrye22 | Football | 0 | Wed Jan 12, 2005 05:54am |
Questions from the test | devdog69 | Volleyball | 14 | Mon Oct 14, 2002 11:07am |