ASA Umpires Exam; Question 39

Skahtboi · #1 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 15, 2005, 01:20pm

"A batter reaches up and deflects an inside pitch..."

The vagueness of this year's test is really starting to get to me. Is this deflection with a bat? If so, then I have a foul ball. Or...is it with the hand? If so, then it would be interference.

How hard would it have been for the test writers to include either the words "with their hand" or "with the bat?"

IRISHMAFIA · #2 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 15, 2005, 05:21pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Skahtboi
"A batter reaches up and deflects an inside pitch..."

The vagueness of this year's test is really starting to get to me. Is this deflection with a bat? If so, then I have a foul ball. Or...is it with the hand? If so, then it would be interference.

How hard would it have been for the test writers to include either the words "with their hand" or "with the bat?"

I had no problem understanding a person reaches with their hand, not a bat. But, then again, I am just a mere hi skul grachiate!

whiskers_ump · #3 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 15, 2005, 11:26pm

Quote:

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Quote:

Originally posted by Skahtboi
"A batter reaches up and deflects an inside pitch..."

The vagueness of this year's test is really starting to get to me. Is this deflection with a bat? If so, then I have a foul ball. Or...is it with the hand? If so, then it would be interference.

How hard would it have been for the test writers to include either the words "with their hand" or "with the bat?"

I had no problem understanding a person reaches with their hand, not a bat. But, then again, I am just a mere hi skul grachiate!

I'll drink to that...

even though I am not sure what it is!

Skahtboi · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 16, 2005, 09:26am

Quote:

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Quote:

Originally posted by Skahtboi
"A batter reaches up and deflects an inside pitch..."

The vagueness of this year's test is really starting to get to me. Is this deflection with a bat? If so, then I have a foul ball. Or...is it with the hand? If so, then it would be interference.

How hard would it have been for the test writers to include either the words "with their hand" or "with the bat?"

I had no problem understanding a person reaches with their hand, not a bat. But, then again, I am just a mere hi skul grachiate!

That, too, was my assumption. Yet how many times have we been told not to assume, or read into the test, anything that isn't there? Again, the addition of the words "with their hand" would eliminate all doubt.