Physical tests...

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And you are telling me that the only time you review rules is when the test is out?

I'm not sure where you inferred that.

I crack a rule book quite frequently. I enjoy rules analysis and application, which is partially why I enjoy forums like these. As for our test, it's closed book, 50 questions for rules, and 25-30 questions on mechanics. We hold three rules clinics prior to the test. I also use RefSchool software, which isn't perfect, but is still a solid tool, just the same.

The example that Bob provided regarding copying down answers is hardly preparation, in my opinion. If that's the norm in some places, no wonder there are some so disillusioned.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I'm not sure where you inferred that.

I crack a rule book quite frequently. I enjoy rules analysis and application, which is partially why I enjoy forums like these. As for our test, it's closed book, 50 questions for rules, and 25-30 questions on mechanics. We hold three rules clinics prior to the test. I also use RefSchool software, which isn't perfect, but is still a solid tool, just the same.

You are telling me that the rules test is the only reason you pick up a rulebook? You do not have conversations with other officials during the season, off-season or at association meetings? Then what do you do after the test is over? Do you stop picking up the rulebooks the rest of the season or stop having discussions? I get into more discussions at the bar when the game is over than just about any time during the test taking process.

Originally Posted by bainsey

The example that Bob provided regarding copying down answers is hardly preparation, in my opinion. If that's the norm in some places, no wonder there are some so disillusioned.

What Bob described is what takes place in our area because our test is open book and that ideal is endorsed by our higher ups. But if you think there is not other rules discussion, debates or preparation, then you would be sadly mistaken. Football rules are much harder than any basketball rule and application and in that sport I have been involved in similar issues since early June dealing with rules that have more aspects to them and more detail. I was telling someone this weekend I have been talking football at least 2 or 3 times a week since June and want to get to a real game already. Because I am a clinician in basketball and attend camps in the spring, that process has been already for the basketball season since May (season ended in March). It is a 12 month cycle in basketball for sure and these are not even that hard to grasp as I have to deal with working HS and college football.

And as I said before the NF was the test of choice for years and we had to know the difference between what "must" or "shall" more than anything. Or know the inches of the circumference of a basketball or how long the net could be. Great questions of things we will either not measure or probably would not enforce to the point the game is stopped or the item is replace just based on if something is an inch off.

Better yet, the wording in the test was so "cute" that it made no sense and had to be thrown out and did not count towards anyone's score. And it appears there is a lot of delusional behavior when you read this site and people do not know basic things by the nature of their questions and many of those folks are taking closed book tests. I am not seeing the big time benefit to a closed book test.

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are telling me that the rules test is the only reason you pick up a rulebook?

For the second time, no.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

For the second time, no.

What readied me for that moment? Rules tests, or more specifically, the preparation for such tests. I can't think of a better way to drill these things into our heads.

These were your comments, not mine.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

These were your comments, not mine.

Peace

I can't see how his two comments that you're trying to connect have anything to do with each other.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I can't see how his two comments that you're trying to connect have anything to do with each other.

When you say there is not a better reason to learn rules but when you are taking a rules test, then you claim that you can review rules by other means (which is likely a longer period of time). Which one is it?

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

When you say there is not a better reason to learn rules but when you are taking a rules test, then you claim that you can review rules by other means (which is likely a longer period of time). Which one is it?

Peace

No, one does not mean the other. All he's saying is the rules test helps to focus his study time in a way that helps him prepare for game situations. You're reading too much into it.