2009 ASA Umpire Exam

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by SergioJ

Yes, if I was going. Unfortunately, due to skinny wallet this year, will not be able to attend. Will miss everybody.

Serg

Man, there goes the quota. Who is going to be our designated interpreter in the banquet room? Sonny will never be able to get a cup of coffee now.

[SergioJ]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Man, there goes the quota. Who is going to be our designated interpreter in the banquet room? Sonny will never be able to get a cup of coffee now.

That's probably a good thing for Sonny! Heard he's still going to the bathroom from "all" the coffee he drank.

And yes, I am very disappointed that I will have to miss it this year. Unfortunately, my tin cup didn't have enough pennies!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by SergioJ

That's probably a good thing for Sonny! Heard he's still going to the bathroom from "all" the coffee he drank.

And yes, I am very disappointed that I will have to miss it this year. Unfortunately, my tin cup didn't have enough pennies!

Would it help if we put a fence around OKC with a tunnel to the Biltmore?









It's a joke, people!

[Skahtboi]

YouTube - rimshot

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by SergioJ

That's probably a good thing for Sonny! Heard he's still going to the bathroom from "all" the coffee he drank.

And yes, I am very disappointed that I will have to miss it this year. Unfortunately, my tin cup didn't have enough pennies!

Be sure to remind Sonny to take the key - wouldn't want to get locked in a bathroom.

[SRW]

An email from K.Ryan sent today:


There has been a mistake found on the 2009 exam. W.S. [name changed to initials by SRW] caught it and sent it to me. We will post something on the web so all will know but it will be in February’s plays and clarifications. The question is number 31. The answer listed as the correct answer is letter D which is incorrect. None of the answers are totally correct. The question involves an Illegal player and the answer listed as the correct answer is for an unreported substitute. The problem is they used to have the same penalty. Since the penalty for the unreported substitute has changed because of the rule change they are no longer disqualified and when found entered into the game. An Illegal Player is still disqualified and that is what the answer should have said. The question can be discarded when the test is taken, or however you want to handle it. I apologies for the incorrect answer and will look closer next time to make sure the test is totally correct. I appreciate your understanding.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally Posted by SRW

An email from K.Ryan sent today:


There has been a mistake found on the 2009 exam. W.S. [name changed to initials by SRW] caught it and sent it to me. We will post something on the web so all will know but it will be in February’s plays and clarifications. The question is number 31. The answer listed as the correct answer is letter D which is incorrect. None of the answers are totally correct. The question involves an Illegal player and the answer listed as the correct answer is for an unreported substitute. The problem is they used to have the same penalty. Since the penalty for the unreported substitute has changed because of the rule change they are no longer disqualified and when found entered into the game. An Illegal Player is still disqualified and that is what the answer should have said. The question can be discarded when the test is taken, or however you want to handle it. I apologies for the incorrect answer and will look closer next time to make sure the test is totally correct. I appreciate your understanding.

So, does that make the correct answer C?

[Tru_in_Blu]

I've sometimes been told that I might be reading too much into a question when I take these tests. Question 31 is a good example of that. I am not quite sure if I should try and answer the question as written, or what I think the author was looking for in the first place.

In a similar situation, I have an issue with Question 40:

40) The official bat shall be:
a) Of one piece construction.
b) Multi-piece permanently assembled construction.
c) Two-piece interchangeable construction.
d) All of the above.

This is included in the 2009 Playing Rule Changes, and while the question almost mirrors the Rule: 3 Section 1 K wording, the combination of answers matching the statement portion of the test question are mutually exclusive.

I'd suggest that the wording should have been something like:

The official bat MAY be: [with same answers],

or, the last answer amended to be:

d) ANY of the above.

If this was an SAT or similar test, answer "d" cannot be correct since a bat can only be one piece construction, or two-piece construction, or multi-piece construction. I cannot satisfy all three conditions. Two-piece could be considered multi-piece or vice-versa, but neither of those could be one piece; and one piece cannot obviously be two-piece or multi-piece.

But I think, and hope, that the answer they're looking for is "d". That's what I pick.

Ted

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

I've sometimes been told that I might be reading too much into a question when I take these tests. Question 31 is a good example of that. I am not quite sure if I should try and answer the question as written, or what I think the author was looking for in the first place.

In a similar situation, I have an issue with Question 40:

40) The official bat shall be:
a) Of one piece construction.
b) Multi-piece permanently assembled construction.
c) Two-piece interchangeable construction.
d) All of the above.

This is included in the 2009 Playing Rule Changes, and while the question almost mirrors the Rule: 3 Section 1 K wording, the combination of answers matching the statement portion of the test question are mutually exclusive.

I'd suggest that the wording should have been something like:

The official bat MAY be: [with same answers],

or, the last answer amended to be:

d) ANY of the above.

If this was an SAT or similar test, answer "d" cannot be correct since a bat can only be one piece construction, or two-piece construction, or multi-piece construction. I cannot satisfy all three conditions. Two-piece could be considered multi-piece or vice-versa, but neither of those could be one piece; and one piece cannot obviously be two-piece or multi-piece.

But I think, and hope, that the answer they're looking for is "d". That's what I pick.

Ted

Yes, I believe you are reading too much into this question. This is not an SAT or any other type of test other than a simple softball rules test.

Originally Posted by SRW

An email from K.Ryan sent today:


There has been a mistake found on the 2009 exam. W.S. [name changed to initials by SRW] caught it and sent it to me. We will post something on the web so all will know but it will be in February’s plays and clarifications. The question is number 31. The answer listed as the correct answer is letter D which is incorrect. None of the answers are totally correct. The question involves an Illegal player and the answer listed as the correct answer is for an unreported substitute. The problem is they used to have the same penalty. Since the penalty for the unreported substitute has changed because of the rule change they are no longer disqualified and when found entered into the game. An Illegal Player is still disqualified and that is what the answer should have said. The question can be discarded when the test is taken, or however you want to handle it. I apologies for the incorrect answer and will look closer next time to make sure the test is totally correct. I appreciate your understanding.

As a college instructor, I had to laugh at the part I highlighted in red. Now I'm starting to have sinister thoughts as I'm writing an exam for the students...hmmm....