NFHS question 21

roadking · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 07:23pm

Is question number 21 false?

devdog69 · #2 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 07:34pm

what's the question, don't have my test in front of me.

roadking · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 09:00pm

"point of interuption" is a method of resuming play after a double personel or technical foul.

Jurassic Referee · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 09:05pm

The rules reference on the answer key for #21 is R4-36-1.

devdog69 · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 09:10pm

Quote:

Originally posted by roadking
"point of interuption" is a method of resuming play after a double personel or technical foul.

Oh, that one...It is true...the word 'double' extends to mean double personal or double technical, which makes the question true. There was much discussion around my area about it and one guy even called the state and they said it was True.

roadking · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 09:11pm

i guess i may reading to much into it, but if its a double personel it at the POI. A technical foul would be division line oppisite table.

devdog69 · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 09:18pm

it all depends on if they mean a technical or a 'double technical', the former would be division line, the latter at the POI

roadking · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 09:22pm

true, but thats what confusing about the question it does not say double technical. i believe it to be false by nfhs letter of the rule.

Jurassic Referee · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 09:22pm

Quote:

Originally posted by roadking
i guess i may reading to much into it, but if its a double personel it at the POI. A technical foul would be division line oppisite table.

They meant double personal and double technical in the question. The FED coulda been a little clearer on this one - fer sure.

The correct answer is "True".

BktBallRef · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 14, 2005, 10:08pm

Quote:

Originally posted by roadking
true, but thats what confusing about the question it does not say double technical. i believe it to be false by nfhs letter of the rule.

The answer is TRUE.

If they had meant it the way you're interpreting it, it would have read,

"Point of interuption is a method of resuming play after a double personal FOUL or A technical foul."

The fact that the statement doesn't include FOUL or A makes the statement TRUE.

"Point of interuption is a method of resuming play after a double personal or technical foul," meaning that the words double and foul extend to the conjunctive phrase "personal or technical."

Nevadaref · #11 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 15, 2005, 07:00am

Quote:

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

Originally posted by roadking
true, but thats what confusing about the question it does not say double technical. i believe it to be false by nfhs letter of the rule.

The answer is TRUE.

If they had meant it the way you're interpreting it, it would have read,

"Point of interuption is a method of resuming play after a double personal FOUL or A technical foul."

The fact that the statement doesn't include FOUL or A makes the statement TRUE.

"Point of interuption is a method of resuming play after a double personal or technical foul," meaning that the words double and foul extend to the conjunctive phrase "personal or technical."

Well put, Tony.
Now just sit back and wait for Juulie to come along and give you your ATTABOY.

rainmaker · #12 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 15, 2005, 03:42pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Quote:

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

Originally posted by roadking
true, but thats what confusing about the question it does not say double technical. i believe it to be false by nfhs letter of the rule.

The answer is TRUE.

If they had meant it the way you're interpreting it, it would have read,

"Point of interuption is a method of resuming play after a double personal FOUL or A technical foul."

The fact that the statement doesn't include FOUL or A makes the statement TRUE.

"Point of interuption is a method of resuming play after a double personal or technical foul," meaning that the words double and foul extend to the conjunctive phrase "personal or technical."

Well put, Tony.
Now just sit back and wait for Juulie to come along and give you your ATTABOY.

Yes, Tony gave a good explanation. But just for the record, I'm not Mr. Grammar Guy. So my "Attaboy"'s are completely unofficial.

jeffpea · #13 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 15, 2005, 05:30pm

Per the results of my test w/ the Illinois High School Assoc., the correct answer is False. The question does not say "double technical foul" - therefore you utilize the standard resumption of play method. Double T - use POI; single T - use normal method.

The question isn't worded all clearly as it could have been, but try not to read too much into the question. Simply read it as it's written and you should be O.K.

deecee · #14 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 15, 2005, 06:01pm

it as it is written and it makes no sense

what is a double personal (a new drink at starbucks perhaps)? i think the explanation given above makes sense as far as english is written.

instead of saying "double personal foul or double techincal foul" just keep the common firt and last word and make it "double personal or technical foul"

Jurassic Referee · #15 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 15, 2005, 06:10pm

Quote:

Originally posted by jeffpea
Per the results of my test w/ the Illinois High School Assoc., the correct answer is False. The question does not say "double technical foul" - therefore you utilize the standard resumption of play method. Double T - use POI; single T - use normal method.

The question isn't worded all clearly as it could have been, but try not to read too much into the question. Simply read it as it's written and you should be O.K.

Jeff, I'd double check that one with the state, if I was you. I've got the answer key put out by the FED. The answer on the official NFHS answer key for #21 on the Part 1 exam is True.