ASA Qeustion #50.

[buddha69]

R1 is on 2B. B2 singles to right firld. R1 reounds 3B attempting to score and runs into the plate umpire. R1 is lying on the ground when he is tagged by F5. Which is Correct ruling?

a. Umpire interference is ruled and R1 is returned to 3B.
b. Umpire interference is ruled and R1 is returned to 2B.
c. Umpire interference is ruled and R1 is awarded home.
d. R1 is ruled out.

would that answer be C.

I try to find this in the 2004 offical rules handbook. Help.

thanks

[Skahtboi]

Welcome to the wonderful world of ASA test taking, the one umpire test that actually requires a person to really think.

Okay, Buddha, look in your rule book index under "umpires" and then "interference" and "interference (plate umpire)." Look up the referenced rules and then ask yourself this question, "when, according to these rules can umpire interference be called?" I think once you read through that, you will come up with the only answer available to you.

[Edited by Skahtboi on Mar 1st, 2004 at 05:43 PM]

[chuck chopper]

Scott, Great answer. Give a fish to a hungry man, tomorrow he is hungry again. Show him how to fish, tomorrow he try to help himself.
.
Buddah..the first time you take these tests they are tricky.
You have to know how to really dig for those answers & definitions. Interpretation also comes into play. That is why this forum is such a big help. Take some time to read the old subjects we have discussed.

[TexBlue]

Good answer. When I first started, I tried to read too much into the questions. Don't do that. As far as 50 goes, Scott's answer is as good as you're gonna get from anyone. You'll learn it and remember it if you look it up. I took the time to look up all 100 answers and write the rule(s) down that pertained to my answer. This is a good refresher course for the rules. You read a lot more than just the rule for the answer this way. You just need a lot of time to burn.

[greymule]

Beware of taking the rule book literally, Buddha, and don't expect crystal-clear writing.

If you want to see a classic example of ASA ambiguity, check out the post labeled "What is ASA referring to?" which deals with a sentence added to the rule book this year. The sentence contains two errors in syntax, one punctuation error, and one minor error in parallelism. (Amazingly, it does not contain a grammatical error.)

I would recommend the ASA casebook. It isn't written any better, but it does cover many specific examples that might be hard to determine strictly from the rule book. ASA doesn't advertise it, but it is available if you call them.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by greymule
Beware of taking the rule book literally, Buddha, and don't expect crystal-clear writing.

If you want to see a classic example of ASA ambiguity, check out the post labeled "What is ASA referring to?" which deals with a sentence added to the rule book this year. The sentence contains two errors in syntax, one punctuation error, and one minor error in parallelism. (Amazingly, it does not contain a grammatical error.)

I would recommend the ASA casebook. It isn't written any better, but it does cover many specific examples that might be hard to determine strictly from the rule book. ASA doesn't advertise it, but it is available if you call them.

I completely disagree. An umpire shouldn't even consider a case book until they are finished their first year of umpiring. I have seen too many attempt to use it as a short cut and that presents more questions than answers.

As far as ASA's rulebook is concerned, it is one of the easiest to read and comprehend. The order in which it is organized is sensible and relative to the game itself.

As far as any errors, it is written for people to read. Many of the people in this country would strain to comprehend many of the rules if presented in 100% error-free.

[TexBlue]

As far as any errors, it is written for people to read. Many of the people in this country would strain to comprehend many of the rules if presented in 100% error-free.
__________________________________________________ _______


Yeah, but, Mike, I'd sure like to give it a try just once. Maybe I could prove your point, maybe not. But I just gotta think I'm as intelligent as whoever writes the rules, so I could probably understand what they write. Surely you're not suggesting it's written that to protect the players and umpires of the game are you?

I don't mean to hint that any other organization is better with their rule book. Heck, PONY has a "vase" on their infield, instead of a "base". For about 6 years now. Think they're gonna change that? Not yet.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by TexBlue
Good answer. When I first started, I tried to read too much into the questions. Don't do that. As far as 50 goes, Scott's answer is as good as you're gonna get from anyone. You'll learn it and remember it if you look it up. I took the time to look up all 100 answers and write the rule(s) down that pertained to my answer. This is a good refresher course for the rules. You read a lot more than just the rule for the answer this way. You just need a lot of time to burn.

I do that with all the associations I work for. I also print
any associations rules that are current and on-line and keep them
in a loose leaf notebook. ASA is going to give us theirs one of these
days....Right Mike? J/K......

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by TexBlue
As far as any errors, it is written for people to read. Many of the people in this country would strain to comprehend many of the rules if presented in 100% error-free.
__________________________________________________ _______


Yeah, but, Mike, I'd sure like to give it a try just once. Maybe I could prove your point, maybe not. But I just gotta think I'm as intelligent as whoever writes the rules, so I could probably understand what they write. Surely you're not suggesting it's written that to protect the players and umpires of the game are you?

I don't mean to hint that any other organization is better with their rule book. Heck, PONY has a "vase" on their infield, instead of a "base". For about 6 years now. Think they're gonna change that? Not yet.

It wouldn't be bad. I believe that not everything fits perfectly into a particular context, especially when it comes to specifics involving rules to a ball game.

Please note that ASA spent years trying to get the book to a manageable size. The book has a purpose and that does not include placing high on a best seller list.

[whiskers_ump]

Mike,

The ink was still wet on the post when you answered that
one...

[greymule]

The rules could be written free of errors; free of ambiguity; in plain, precise, and accurate English; and in fewer words.

The rule book does not need a William Faulkner to rewrite it so that it wins literary prizes. It simply needs careful revision and editing. I'm not singling out ASA either. The Fed and NSA books are no better.

Naturally, an umpire should not expect to use the case book as a shortcut through or substitute for the rule book.

[greymule]

Buddha, the index in this year's sensibly organized rule book tells you to look in Rule 8, Section 7 for umpire interference (FP). You won't find it there, but you will find it in Rule 8, Section 6. Last year's book cited 8-7-F, but it was in 8-6-F. You will find that it's hit and miss with the index and Rule 8.

Look through the section on SP pitching regulations, too. Section 1 tells you to call a dead ball if the pitcher's foot loses contact with the pitcher's plate during the delivery. You are also to rule an illegal pitch and warn the pitcher. Then Section 7 tells you that any violation of Sections 1 through 7 is an illegal pitch, and if the batter swings at it or contacts it, the illegal pitch is nullified and all play stands. So a batter can apparently hit a pitch after you've called the ball dead. But now read the case book, and you'll find, in one example, a rather casual mention concerning the pitcher delivering an illegal pitch before the umpire is able to stop play.

Eventually, and certainly with the help of this board, you'll learn what to do in these situations. Unfortunately, it takes a lot of experience and consultation to fill in the "holes" in the book.

Again, I am not singling out ASA. The MLB rule book, for example, requires several additional books of interpretation.

[Skahtboi]

I am still waiting to see what Buddha has learned.

[buddha69]

A

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
I completely disagree. An umpire shouldn't even consider a case book until they are finished their first year of umpiring. I have seen too many attempt to use it as a short cut and that presents more questions than answers.

I completely disagree with your complete disagreement! Actually, I don't completely disagree, I just liked the sound of saying that! What I do say is that this is entirely individual. Some people need the specific examples of the case book to put the rules into context, to help them visualize the application, and to learn it. This is pretty close to the advice given in the Umpire Manual, "To know the rules thoroughly requires constand and analytical study. It does not suffice to only read the rules. They must be studied so that mental pictures of plays and situations result." The case book can be a big help in putting the rules to work in real situations. My advice to a new umpire would be to read the rule book cover to cover. Then go back and study it thoroughly. Then, when you think you are ready, use the case book as a test. Cover the ruling of each case play, read the play, give your ruling (looking up the rules if you need to), and then uncover the ruling to read the official answer. Very effective learning technique, IMO.

As far as ASA's rulebook is concerned, it is one of the easiest to read and comprehend.

Damning with faint praise.

The order in which it is organized is sensible and relative to the game itself.

True, as evidenced by NFHS rewriting certain rules to, as they say, put it in a more sensible order, and what do you know - it is organized like ASA.

As far as any errors, it is written for people to read. Many of the people in this country would strain to comprehend many of the rules if presented in 100% error-free.

True, but that does not mean errors help. Also, but that does not excuse poor syntax that actually contributes to misunderstanding, or poor choice of words that must be explained extensively in POEs and still results in inconsistent understanding, etc. The ASA rule book could benefit greatly by being gone over by a good umpire who is also an English teacher. Do you know any?