2018 USA Umpire Exam
 

I understand that the Umpire Manual will be available on-line this year, but not until January.

In going over the exam, I came across this question:

44) In the Two Umpire System, with no runners on base, the base umpire has the option of starting behind or off of the 1B side of the second basemen, OR walking the line in foul territory on the 1B line.
a. True.
b. False.

It comes under the Mechanic Questions, so there is no indication if the question refers to slow pitch or fast pitch.

I also know that in the slow pitch game, we've gone from on the line to off the line over the years.

Given the location of the question on the test, might this be an indication that umpires will be given the option in both fast and slow pitch games?

Anyone heard anything like that?

I haven't seen a test yet. Can we assume it is not in a group of fast or slow only?

Wasn't the "off the line" position negated last year?

No, you can't assume it's in a group of fast or slow only. I told you where it was.

For slow pitch last year, we're off the line; for fast pitch, walking the line.

OK, it was not negated/removed. :o

I must have heard/seen that it might or someone who thought it should be. :rolleyes:

We just had our first Rules and Mechanics Clinic here in So Cal and no mention of an option was given we only worked walking the line with no runners on.

No option, unless things have changed. When in Rome...

Moving off the line in FP takes away the only good angle for the BU to observe the pitcher's delivery and check swing.

SP has been off the line for years, but I did hear a rumor there was a discussion of bringing them back to the line. Never heard if that was a factual discussion and, if so, any resolution.

This confirms post #4.

So, without 2018 manuals yet, we don't know if the start position was changed. If it was, the test question becomes false.

If not, it is true for SP, false for FP, so don't know how to answer.

The fact that the question is about offering an option would make lead me to believe it false for all games

I agree with that. Since the question is posted in the Mechanics section, I wondered if it was a test question based on an update. Sometimes we see questions on new or changed rules in the test.

So I'd say the statement would have to be false because it would depend upon what game is being worked. If slow, off the line; if fast walk the line.

In fact, if the question was placed in either of the alternative slow pitch or fast pitch sections, it would still have to be false. Umpires do not have a choice, you go to the spot based on which game you're working.

OK, sure, "has the option" makes it false for either and therefore all. :rolleyes:

I just took a quick look at the 2017 manual...two umpire system, in either game, there is no option for the base umpire with no runners on base.

FP starts on the line, SP starts behind F4.

I don't know if there was discussion about presenting an option at the council meeting, but I can check with some of my sources to see what I can find out.

There has been talk for the last few years about moving the SP base umpire back to the line with no runners on, but it has not been implemented. I also remember about 10 - 15 years ago, a former NUS member was advocating giving the FP base umpire the option to start behind F4 with no runners, but was never able to get much support.

There was no change to the mechanics in this area.

Next one up for discussion:

41) In a Fast Pitch game, the pitcher reaches down and places her fingers/hand in the dirt around the pitching plate and does not wipe the fingers/hand off before bringing them in contact with the ball. U3 calls an illegal pitch and explains to the pitcher and their coach that it is illegal to
place a foreign substance on the ball. The offensive coach protests that this is a misapplication of the rule as dirt is not a foreign substance.
What is the proper ruling?
a. Dirt is a foreign substance, so the illegal pitch is upheld.
b. The pitcher is warned if they apply a foreign substance to the ball again they will be ejected.
c. The illegal pitch call is reversed, as dirt is not considered a foreign substance.
d. Both a. and b. are correct.

I know the answer to this question, but cannot find the specific reference in the rules book. It was addressed in the March, 2010 Rules & Clarifications.

Any tips?

It's not addressed in the rule book because dirt is not a foreign substance to the ball. I believe that is what the clarification points out.