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.

You ever seen a ball manufactured with dirt on it? I haven't. Dirt is a foreign substance. Just not one they want treated as such. The clarification made that clear. But if you haven't seen the clarification your reasoning isn't a safe way to get there.

If you want to take that approach then absolutely anything not involved in the manufacturing process is foreign to the ball. Rain, dew, dirt, chalk, sweat etc etc etc.

There is no need for it to be addressed in the rule book, dirt is not considered to be a foreign substance by any rule set and does not require the hand to be wiped after touching it. NCAA is the only exception.

Yes, intentionally applying any of those things violates the written rule. You know how it's meant to be applied so you're ignoring the fact that the rule is poorly written. Somebody just learning is likely to make this mistake. That's why it's on the test and there's a clarification. But wouldn't it be better just to put it in the rule.

Everything can't be in the rule book, NCAA tries has a monster rule book that is hundreds of pages and still has a case book as well as clarifications.

I get that everything can't be in the rule book. Just like all the things that umpires shouldn't do can't be in the Umpire Manual. (My favorite is the umpire that tells the pitcher all the details after a mid-inning pitching change. And points to every base where a runner is standing. :mad: )

But every test question typically has a reference attached on the answer sheet(s). I can't believe they would cite a Rules & Clarification reference from about 8 years ago. There has to be something more concrete than that. (And I think concrete would be ruled a foreign substance. :p )

The rule reference on the test will probably be exactly the same as referenced in the clarification, 6-6A. The rule book is not the only source of information when taking the test, the case book, rule supplements and clarifications all give information on how the written rules are to be applied.

Not only is the rule poorly written, it is antiquated and poorly applied. The rule used to forbid applying a foreign substance to the ball, not the fingers or hands. It has been changed over the years, IMO, to make it easier to apply not better the game. Even if there is dirt on the pitcher's hand, unless it is adhered to the ball, there really shouldn't be a violation.

People forget these rules are decades old and came over from baseball. To affect the flight of a pitched softball, there would have to be an obvious patch of mud or whatever and that isn't going to happen with a pitcher licking his/her fingers or rubbing their hand in the dirt. JMHO

Well I will disagree - I think it does need to be addressed specifically in the rule. "Dirt" should be listed as the exception.

I think our rules and mechanics should be clear enough to be able to take the exam using only those 2 books (soon to be 1 book and a PDF). If we need Rules & Clarifications and/or case plays to glean answers to the exam, it seems like the actual rules and mechanics aren't clear enough.

That's not to say that these items aren't helpful. I have most of the R&Cs in a large file going back several years. And case plays are important to help folks understand the application of a rule given examples. Short of seeing a play live or on video, case plays are a great learning tool.

And as I have already stated, there is no possible way to have everything in the rule book. The NCAA book is well over 200 pages and they attempt to cover everything yet they also have case book as well as what used to be referred to as Ask Dee, a rules clarification document of rules questions asked by officials.

As for wiping the hand, the only mention in the rule book of the need to wipe the hand before touching the ball is if the pitcher licks their fingers. Why do some umpires use this as justification to make the pitcher wipe their hand after touching something else? I have had partners call an IP because the pitcher touched their hair, face, arm etc and not wipe before going to the ball. Apparently even rules clarifications don't work in some cases, just this past spring I believe it was a high school association in Louisiana was instructing their officials to call IP's if the pitcher did not wipe their hand after touching the dirt. NFHS has the exact same clarification on the rule as does USA. Even after being shown the NFHS clarification by several association umpires they changed their ruling from dirt being a foreign substance to it not being an approved drying agent and still demanded the officials call an IP for touching dirt and not wiping even though the clarification says there is no need to wipe the hand.

As long as I have been officiating there has always been a rule book, case book and rules clarifications. All 3 need to be referenced to know the correct way the association wants the rules enforced. As for the question on the test, as I indicated above the only reference to wiping the hand is if the pitcher licks their fingers, that alone would answer the test question strictly from the rule book.

Off topic
 

I believe a visual is required with the verbal outs and count so that also has to signaled with the hands as you tell them. Insert emoticon.

Roger that! If'n I knew how to post a picture, I'd put some up here. :D

What verbal outs? :confused:

Off topic
 

The few dinosaurs I have seen that "brief the pitcher" gesture the outs and count as they tell the pitcher the same and then point to the runners at the bases as they tell them the same.

This year in HS, I had the bases for my next to last game of the year, this was a middle school game with two decent teams, and during the plate conference, my partner - relatively new - decides to give a good 30-45 second lecture n how he's seen way too much obstruction this year, and on and on, while I am doing my best acting job, trying not to look shocked....:eek:

100% agree. The only difference 99.999% of the "foreign substances" makes to the flight of a fast pitch softball is how they effect the pitcher's grip.

Here's an in-game quiz ...

Quick, did she just lick her fingers or adjust her face mask? :eek:

I am a retired Structural Engineer and as such took courses in Soil Mechanics and Foundations Engoneering: "Dirt" is what gets under your finger nails. Soil is a naturally occurring engineering material which can be used as the infield for Softball diamonds, 🤣!

Happy Holidays to everyone!

MRS, Sr.

This next question brings up the discussion about whether or not umpires should or shouldn't inform coaches at the plate conference to have their outfielders raise a hand if a batted ball becomes lodged in fencing, bounces through a hole in a fence, or passes a fence that does not extend all the way to DBT.

We had a situation during a slow-pitch playoff game where the field had the latter scenario where the outfield fence did not extend all the way to another fence demarking DBT. It was essentially a pass-thru area to allow people to get to the other side of the fence to retrieve HR balls.

So in our case, the umpires traditionally tell the coaches that if the ball enters this area, to have their outfielder raise his hand and the base umpire will go out to check the status of the ball. They usually tell the offensive team to keep running as after the fact the umpires can send runners back, but they can't send them forward. So in this case, the runners kept running. Some of the defensive players stopped playing because they saw the ball apparently go past the fence after hitting fair initially. However, before the BU had a chance to check the ball, the right fielder retrieved the ball and threw it in. At that point, the umpires decided that all runners would score. Defense obviously wasn't happy, but we tell the coaches that if you go after the ball, you own it and the results of the play will stand.

I know it's not something that's noted in the Umpire Manual, but what do some of you do in your games/areas?

12) With the score tied in the bottom of the 7th inning, R1 on first base and two outs, B4 hits a deep fly ball down the right-field line. Unable to
make the catch, the right-fielder watches as the ball lands fair and then rolls into foul territory beyond the right-field fence line. R1 scores the
apparent winning run, but the right-fielder informs the umpires the ball rolled beyond the fence line into dead ball territory. What action should
the umpires take?
a. Because the ball rolled into dead ball territory after passing a fielder, the run counts.
b. Because the ball rolled into dead ball territory untouched by the fielder the run counts.
c. This is the same as a blocked ball and R1 should score.
d. This is a two base award. R1 is awarded 3B and B4 is awarded 2B – no run scores.

Ted,

There is nothing in the rule that defines a player raising a hand making the ball in play or out of play. The reality is that a ball blocked or out of play is out and dead whether a player raises a hand or not, and a ball not blocked or out of play remains live even if a player raises a hand. Even if a player makes a play on a ball that the umpire knows is out of play, it is dead; the issue only exists if/when the umpire is unsure if the ball is in play or not.

Raising a hand is only a courtesy so the umpire knows to look and confirm; if the player keeps the umpire from knowing it was out of play, too bad, so sad, the offense gets everything they attain on the play.

Consider this third world example play. On a field with fence openings, the batter hits a fly ball clearly beyond the fence; a defensive player runs off the field, behind the fence, and catches the ball using the Willie Mays basket catch, so as to not raise a hand. Is this a catch on a live ball because the hand was never raised? Don't the rules make it uncatchable because the player is obviously established out of play, without any regard or reference to hand raised or not raised?

I wouldn't change the pregame reminder; I would just add clarification that the ball remains live and assumed playable until the umpire confirms the status as unplayable.

The answer is obviously D.

I don't discuss raising hands or not; but if a partner does, I always clarify that it is only a request to check and more so, the fielder indicating she is not touching the ball.

Because of the shit fields the SP leagues play on in my area and with usually a single umpire, we were trained and continue to use this pre-game notation. It is usually noted that raising a hand or offering some indication simply means the umpire will come out and check when the play is over and if they continue to play the ball, it will be considered in play and all advance will stand if the umpire cannot determine the ball entered DBT.

But I agree with Steve, it is simply a courtesy that just helps the umpire through what could be a difficult situation.

Holy resurrected test question, batman! ASA test question

If this were FED, I'd expect the approved answer to change.

Apparently someone thinks this is important enough to keep putting it on the test. Might this be a result of some analysis that indicates it is one of the questions that the collective group of umpires continues to get wrong from year to year?

28) In the bottom of the 7th inning of a tie game, an unreported substitute for B1 is batting and on the first pitch hits a home run. Before the
umpires leave the playing field the defense, while still in the infield, notifies the umpires that B1’s substitute did not report. The umpire should
rule:
a. B1’s substitute is officially in the game, the run is nullified and B1 is declared out.
b. B1’s substitute run counts because there is no penalty for an unreported substitute and the game is over.
c. B1’s substitute is declared out but the run counts and the game is over.
d. None of the above.

Umpires will understand this verbiage; most players and coaches won't. I dislike the need for the pregame conversation about putting hands up and not playing on a ball out of play, but like Cecil, I usually add the tidbit that a player putting their hands up doesn't kill the play. It only tells the officials, who may be 150+ feet away from dead-ball line, that a player thinks it went out.

Quick question on the Umpire Manual... Will it be posted on the USA website for all to see, or will I need to register and then get some kind of access code to see it?

I have not registered yet.

I thought it was supposed to be posted by 1-1-18.

The umpire manual has been posted on the USA Softball site.

You can download for free. It is ina PDF format.