![]() |
|
|
|||
I also had 6 like that. I ended up with an 85%, so 9 incorrect. I know one I messed up on (I knew the rule, but when I went to confirm it, I couldn't find the damn thing but one that was contradictory, and, of course, someone coincidentally posted the clause I needed two hours after I submitted it.)
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?" |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
We had the same two questions then...the video one where the runner doesn't retouch 3B which stated the defense properly appealed, then the other one that I posted above. Out of protest, even though I got "the tip" I answered four runs scored because w/o that tip, there's no way anybody puts "zero runs score"
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again |
|
|||
Quote:
I can only hope they go back and give credit for either answer, or drop the question, or .... |
|
|||
I had that same question, and I assumed there was an appeal, probably because I definitely remember there were two immediately preceding questions that dealt with appeals, so my mind was in this appeal mode, so to speak. With two questions in a row about runners missing bases on appeals, this bases loaded/runner misses his next base question seemed to fit the pattern of the previous two questions.
|
|
|||
Quote:
I'm curious to see what the correct answer will be on this one: R2, R3, two outs. B1 smashes a drive into left field, and the ball bounces over the fence in fair territory. Both R2 and R3 are awarded home and B1 is awarded second. R3 touches the plate, then R2 touches the plate. The third-base coach yells for R2 to return and touch third since he had missed the bag on his way home. R2 retraces his steps by touching the plate, then going back to touch third; then, once again, coming back to touch home. When the umpire puts the ball into play, the third baseman calls for the ball and appeals that R2 had missed third on his first attempt. The umpire agrees and calls R2 out. a.R2 is out and R3 scores. b.R2 is out and R3's run is disallowed. c.R3 and R2 both score. No out can be awarded since a legal appeal may not be made if the offensive team has drawn attention to any infraction by one of their runners. d.No out is awarded. R3 and R2 score since R2 retraced his steps properly. This illustrates the "last time by" rule. Even though R2's retouch is illegal, I'm betting 'd' will be listed as the proper response. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
It wouldn't be, but I won't be surprised if the test writers overlooked that fact in trying to illustrate 'last time by.'
Maybe they didn't, but that's exactly the sort of mistake they've made in years past, so if they did, it won't surprise me. |
|
|||
do you ever think they put some of those answers doen to mess with people heads and to see what they will answer.. the purpose of the test is to get your head in the book.. I scored very well.. then helped a guy get a 100%.. so the test is not rocket science .. yes it could have been written better.
__________________
"My greatest fear is that when I die, my wife will sell my golf clubs for what I told her I paid for them." |
|
|||
I went with 'a' as well. I trusted them to get the illegal touch right, and this play doesn't illustrate the "last time by" concept.
|
|
||||
Back to the topic:
I have been fortunate enough to go to several weekend clinics that Evans and his staff put on. Great instruction, great teaching. The one thing I, as a 30+ year old (at the time) corporate drone thought was that the instructors seemed rough around the edges and would be an HR person's nightmare. They always mentioned that at the school that the evaluation of a person included off-the-field behavior and started when the students were picked up at the airport. Sounds like the employees of the school didn't practice what they preached. I may just be a Charlie, but I work 3 sports and we follow certain rules about eating and drinking in public because there's a chance people will recognize us from a game or from our officiating role and we don't want the perception of us tarnished by our public behavior. This may just have been pretext to get rid of Jim in favor of TUS, but this is a multi-billion dollar company (MLB with MiLB) who decided to cut ties with a small vendor who provided a limited service because they did something that ended up painting them with the same brush in places like the NYT and Deadspin. The school provides a dozen employees for MiLB (this year's estimate). If you remove the particulars of who it is and who it involves, would this be a surprising decision? |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
JEAPU Annotated Rules | Sal Giaco | Baseball | 31 | Wed Jul 22, 2009 08:31am |
JEAPU Desert Classic | Roland Wiederaenders | Baseball | 2 | Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:19pm |