The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 04, 2020, 12:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,793
FED Exam Strikes Again

This question appeared twice. I guess it's very important we all know what a MF is since it gets called so often.

A situation in which two or more teammates commit personal fouls against the same opponent at approximately the same time is known as:

A) A multiple foul.
B) A double foul.
C) A simultaneous foul.
D) An intentional foul.
E) A false double foul.

The premise of this question is wrong as the act described in the question is BI, not GT.

If a goaltending violation is penalized for touching the ball entering the basket from below:

A) The basket counts if the violation is by the defense.
B) No points are scored, regardless of the violating team.
C) The ball is awarded to a team based on the alternating-possession arrow.
D) None of the above.

Is there anything in the Case Book that defines "legally enters the court" as having both feet on the court?

A substitute becomes a player when:

A) He/she reports to the scorer.
B) He/she has both feet inside the playing court.
C) He/she is beckoned onto the court by an official.
D) All of the above.

I am pretty sure I got this one wrong.

It is an out-of-bounds violation if a player:

A) Leaves the court to avoid a screen.
B) Leaves the court to avoid a foul.
C) Leaves the court to avoid teammates.
D) All of the above.
E) None of the above.

Last edited by SC Official; Wed Nov 04, 2020 at 01:14pm. Reason: another question
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 04, 2020, 12:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,540
It was awful. I never collaborate (I don’t believe in doing that) and got a 92%. That’s by far my lowest score in a decade. I attribute it all to lousily worded questions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 04, 2020, 01:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,793
Quote:
Originally Posted by crosscountry55 View Post
It was awful. I never collaborate (I don’t believe in doing that) and got a 92%. That’s by far my lowest score in a decade. I attribute it all to lousily worded questions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep. I got my lowest score in a few years, too.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 04, 2020, 02:12pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,219
The Part 2 Exam was stupid as well. Glad my main state stays away from this test and has for over 10 years.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 04, 2020, 03:32pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
Poorly Worded Questions ...

Speaking of poorly worded questions.

I got an IAABO "you make the call" video today. The situation was illegal live ball contact on a shooter that may, or may not, have been excessive.

The question had only two choices for an answer: intentional foul, or personal foul, as if they're mutually exclusive.

An intentional foul can be personal foul.

I deemed the contact to not be excessive and answered personal foul.

Even if I had ruled an excessive contact intentional foul, that would still be a personal foul, so technically personal foul wouldn't be wrong.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Wed Nov 04, 2020 at 05:04pm.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 04, 2020, 07:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SE Ohio
Posts: 1,069
I really dont get why they try this too cute by half crap, especially when there is lower hanging fruit that can waste half an hour at local rules meetings. It can be fun exercises sometimes on the ride up to a game, in locker room for pregame, or to torture the rookies, or bar after the game.

Just glad that after getting your varsity classification here, we dont have to worry about those tests anymore.

Watched our online state rules meeting and in going over the POE this year, the infamous 2012 above the shoulder contact POE was brought back up. Too bad its still not codified and you have to do some digging to find the thing.( on arbiter here if you need a refresher: https://www1.arbitersports.com/Group...%20Outline.pdf)
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 04, 2020, 08:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,793
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB View Post
I really dont get why they try this too cute by half crap, especially when there is lower hanging fruit that can waste half an hour at local rules meetings. It can be fun exercises sometimes on the ride up to a game, in locker room for pregame, or to torture the rookies, or bar after the game.

Just glad that after getting your varsity classification here, we dont have to worry about those tests anymore.

Watched our online state rules meeting and in going over the POE this year, the infamous 2012 above the shoulder contact POE was brought back up. Too bad its still not codified and you have to do some digging to find the thing.( on arbiter here if you need a refresher: https://www1.arbitersports.com/Group...%20Outline.pdf)
I don't think they try to trick test takers, I think FED is just so poor at writing and editing material as evidenced by the "contact above the shoulders" POE that never made it into the book that your state is supposed to be enforcing - just one of many examples.

That, and there is always a plethora of dumb questions about multiple fouls and the diameter of the rim that no one cares about.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 05, 2020, 11:09am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
Contact Above The Shoulders ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB View Post
... the infamous 2012 above the shoulder contact POE was brought back up. Too bad its still not codified and you have to do some digging to find the thing ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Official View Post
... "contact above the shoulders" POE that never made it into the book that your state is supposed to be enforcing ...
Contact Above The Shoulders

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 05, 2020, 01:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,793
If FED wants it enforced that way they need to put it in the rules and not require us to rely on 8-year-old interps. Simple as that.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 05, 2020, 01:59pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
Games People Play, Joe South, 1968 ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Official View Post
If FED wants it enforced that way they need to put it in the rules and not require us to rely on 8-year-old interps. Simple as that.
Agree. Stupid NFHS.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2020, 08:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Agree. Stupid NFHS.
No rule NFHS can come up with can be worse than swimming and diving's suit rule. "The suit shall cover the buttocks for men and the buttocks and breasts for women."

Who is going to enforce this rule? The answer, someone who wants their officiating career to end that day (as evidenced by last years brown storm in Alaska over this rule). There are only two possible results from this rule being enforced. The official who makes the call will be black listed because of the appearance having them on deck will portray, or someone will try filing some sort of complaint against said official who will have to defend his/her name in the court of public opinion, if not the court of law.

NFHS can make a rule that a dunk is worth 20 points and it would not be as stupid as the swimming and diving suit rule. That rule is the king, queen and emperor of stupid rules. The fact they didn't get rid of the rule after the storm from last year says all we need to know about the NFHS.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2020, 09:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rockville,MD
Posts: 811
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by chapmaja View Post
No rule NFHS can come up with can be worse than swimming and diving's suit rule. "The suit shall cover the buttocks for men and the buttocks and breasts for women."

Who is going to enforce this rule? The answer, someone who wants their officiating career to end that day (as evidenced by last years brown storm in Alaska over this rule). There are only two possible results from this rule being enforced. The official who makes the call will be black listed because of the appearance having them on deck will portray, or someone will try filing some sort of complaint against said official who will have to defend his/her name in the court of public opinion, if not the court of law.

NFHS can make a rule that a dunk is worth 20 points and it would not be as stupid as the swimming and diving suit rule. That rule is the king, queen and emperor of stupid rules. The fact they didn't get rid of the rule after the storm from last year says all we need to know about the NFHS.
Why is this rule stupid? AFAIK, when it was made, there was a valid reason behind it, to preserve modesty. Or is the rule stupid because enforcing it would cause a sh#storm? If the latter, then skinny-dipping should be legal per NFHS rules (not that it would be advisable) .
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2020, 09:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rockville,MD
Posts: 811
Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Official View Post
This question appeared twice. I guess it's very important we all know what a MF is since it gets called so often.

A situation in which two or more teammates commit personal fouls against the same opponent at approximately the same time is known as:

A) A multiple foul.
B) A double foul.
C) A simultaneous foul.
D) An intentional foul.
E) A false double foul.

The premise of this question is wrong as the act described in the question is BI, not GT.

If a goaltending violation is penalized for touching the ball entering the basket from below:

A) The basket counts if the violation is by the defense.
B) No points are scored, regardless of the violating team.
C) The ball is awarded to a team based on the alternating-possession arrow.
D) None of the above.

Is there anything in the Case Book that defines "legally enters the court" as having both feet on the court?

A substitute becomes a player when:

A) He/she reports to the scorer.
B) He/she has both feet inside the playing court.
C) He/she is beckoned onto the court by an official.
D) All of the above.

I am pretty sure I got this one wrong.

It is an out-of-bounds violation if a player:

A) Leaves the court to avoid a screen.
B) Leaves the court to avoid a foul.
C) Leaves the court to avoid teammates.
D) All of the above.
E) None of the above.
The second question is inane. What purpose does it serve? You can't have goaltending on a ball entering the basket from below, because it is not a try, just like you cannot have goaltending on a throw-in.

I agree with you on #3. A substitute becomes a player when he/she legally enters the court, or if (s)he entered the court illegally, when the ball becomes live. However, that answer is nowhere to be seen. In addition, as BillyMac mentions, the question where the answer choices include intentional foul and personal foul as mutually exclusive makes no sense, because an intentional foul can be a personal foul if committed while the ball is live, or a technical foul if committed while the ball is dead. NFHS should get their act together and hire an editor who knows both the English language and basketball. I'm sick and tired of seeing the same stupid and poorly-written questions showing up over and over again.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2020, 10:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by crosscountry55 View Post
It was awful. I never collaborate (I don’t believe in doing that) and got a 92%. That’s by far my lowest score in a decade. I attribute it all to lousily worded questions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I experienced the same situation on this year's exam. I got a 94 which was my lowest score in awhile. I commented several times to several colleagues just how poorly worded the questions were this year. I had all of the questions that SC Official had in the OP. I guess that the NFHS didn't like my answers. Oh well? Moving on!
__________________
THE FLY IS OPEN, LET'S GO PEAY
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2020, 11:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: NeverNeverLand
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilyazhito View Post
you cannot have goaltending on a throw-in.
.
You can't?
__________________
"A picture is worth a thousand words".
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Four Strikes and You're Out teebob21 Softball 2 Mon Feb 16, 2015 05:59pm
OC strikes again ChrisSportsFan Basketball 21 Wed Jun 29, 2005 06:47am
more on dropped third strikes refjef40 Softball 6 Mon May 20, 2002 01:00am
Fox strikes again Mark Padgett Basketball 13 Fri May 17, 2002 12:37pm
TWO STRIKES YOUR OUT Del-Blue Softball 6 Tue Apr 23, 2002 10:00am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:43pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1