Just got done taking the GHSA part two test which is our closed book test. We give different tests depending on hwo long you've been doing it. Since I'm a second year, I received the easier of the two.

The question I have with the GHSA tests is they're so sloppily written. The Mechanics test we took was absolutely HORRENDOUS. It's hard to understand the questions, much less answer them correctly.

I digress. Here are some of the questions I had a problem with:

Q: The Referee has the authority to order the Line Judge to bring the chains onto the field for measurement.... This sounds true, but of course we all know the Head Linesman would bring the chains in. Even the rulebook says as such.

Q: On fouls during a successful try, the foul will be enforced on the kickoff... This sounds true as well, but then I started thinking. Not if the foul's by A. I asked the person giving the test, and he seemed puzzled himself.

Overall, I don't like rules tests here as they're written. It seems like they actually TRY to trick you, which isn't the purpose. One of my favorite questions was: "The game is won by the team accumilating the most points." Well, duh. I surely hope no one got that question wrong.

welcome the the world of FED test taking. There were a few questions on part 2 this year I really hated the wording because you were not sure what exactly they were asking. Like non player/USC being considered to determine if the period ends or is to be extended. To me you consider all fouls to determine if a period is to be ended. But the way they worded it, it could be true as well as it could be false for an answer.

Here's a good one for ya ... is the game REALLY won by the team accumulating the most points??? What if it is declared a forfeit in the middle of the game because the coach won't leave the field after being tossed ???? Hmmmm ......

SouthGARef,

After taking the GHSA test since it was substituted for the NFHS test I can tell you that the GHSA test designed for the older officials is not any harder. It is just written with more ambiguity than the test you had to take.

There is no doubt that the authors of these tests have never taken courses in the finer art of writing tests. I'm with you, test my knowledge of the rules not my ability to discover a trick question and extrapolate the correct answer.

It is not their trying to trick me that is bad. It is when they write the question and there is a factor that causes you not to be able to determine whether the statement is true or false and you know the rule, the foul, the penalty the enforcement and the signal and you still don't know the answer.

I think the guys that write the test questions are the same ones that write the Trivial Pursuit questions...the alternative is that they are named Rutledge...:D

One of the Questions on the GHSA test was "If the goal post is blue, the referee rules that this is illegal." What does this have to do with what happens on the field?

Because it falls under rule 1-2-5g. By the way, what is the answer to the question? True or false?

I answered false because the NFHS rule book only gives recommended colors not required. Silver, White and Yellow I believe, I do not have my rule book with me. My point was that the test questions were not geared to what actually happens on the field. I don't know of anybody who can memorize the rulebook.

Here's what kills me about the wording of that one:

"If the goal post is blue, the referee rules that this is illegal."

Does he? Did the referee notice? If he was not supposed to rule it illegal, is it possible that at least 1 referee somewhere DOES (incorrectly) rule it illegal?

Shouldn't the question be: "If the goal post is blue, the referee should rule that this is illegal."

In the first question, since I was not there for the event, I don't know if the referee at that particular event rules it illegal or not.

Well you have my vote for rule writer. lol :D