2010 ASA Exam

[strike4]

Is it appropriate to ask for an opinion on a question on the exam? If so, here is the question.

35. B1 has an altered bat that is detected by the plate umpire before B1 enters the batter's box. What is the ruling?


a) B1 is called out.
b) B1 is disqualified.
c) B1 is ejected.
d) The bat is removed from the game as a preventative measure. No other penalty.

Reference 2010 ASA Umpire Manual, Rule 7-6-B.

I think both a and c are correct answers to the question. Rule 7-6 says the batter is out. The effect on 7-6-B says the batter shall be ejected from the game, and if in a tournament, shall be ejected for the remainder of the tournament.

I think what they are looking for is c since it is defined in rule 7-6-B. This may cause some umpires to miss the question.

Let the fun begin!!!!

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by strike4

Is it appropriate to ask for an opinion on a question on the exam? If so, here is the question.

35. B1 has an altered bat that is detected by the plate umpire before B1 enters the batter's box. What is the ruling?


a) B1 is called out.
b) B1 is disqualified.
c) B1 is ejected.
d) The bat is removed from the game as a preventative measure. No other penalty.

Reference 2010 ASA Umpire Manual, Rule 7-6-B.

I think both a and c are correct answers to the question. Rule 7-6 says the batter is out. The effect on 7-6-B says the batter shall be ejected from the game, and if in a tournament, shall be ejected for the remainder of the tournament.

I think what they are looking for is c since it is defined in rule 7-6-B. This may cause some umpires to miss the question.

Let the fun begin!!!!

That is the rule, but you need to re-read it. The key is in the first 7 words of that particular section.

I'm not giving the answer, per se. You've already found it and announced it. It's up to you to come up with the correct interpretation.

[Skahtboi]

Now...no one else ruin this teaching moment....please!

[strike4]

I gave everybody else a chance to chime in. What is your opinion on this part of the rule?

"or is discovered using an altered or non-approved bat"

Does "discovered using" also cover before you enter the better's box?

What say you?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by strike4

I gave everybody else a chance to chime in. What is your opinion on this part of the rule?

"or is discovered using an altered or non-approved bat"

Does "discovered using" also cover before you enter the better's box?

What say you?

Ding! Ding! Ding! There's your answer.

Since the batter hasn't stepped into the box yet, they haven't violated any rules that would subject them to an out, disqualification or ejection.

So that leaves us with...?

[Stevetheump]

Originally Posted by strike4

I gave everybody else a chance to chime in. What is your opinion on this part of the rule?

"or is discovered using an altered or non-approved bat"

Does "discovered using" also cover before you enter the better's box?

What say you?

strike4 - The bottom line here is "intent." What does the batter "intend" to do with the bat? - USE IT. That's good enough for me.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Stevetheump

strike4 - The bottom line here is "intent." What does the batter "intend" to do with the bat? - USE IT. That's good enough for me.

Yes, he intended to use it, but tell me... What rule did he actually break?

[Stevetheump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Yes, he intended to use it, but tell me... What rule did he actually break?

Illegal bat - Rule 3.1
Altered bat - Rule 3.1.J.
I try to use as much "preventive umpiring" as I can. If I see a problem, I deal with it NOW, not later. In this case, I see him stepping in the batter's box with an illegal or altered bat, I'm ruling on it NOW, BEFORE any further action happens (which will only complicate matters).

[Tru_in_Blu]

Entering the batter's box is not the same as entering the field of play.

If you can head this off at the pass, everyone's better for it.

When the surgeon enters the operating room, he's surrounded by any number of tools. Hopefully he's not intending to use them all. He might ask the attending nurse for a particular implement and receive the wrong one. If the surgeon or someone else notices before it's used, everyone's better for it.

There's a reason why "intent" was removed from so many of the interference scenarios. It's too difficult to determine. Yes, I can see where the 1st batter of the game might approach HP with an illegal/altered bat and we could surmise that it was his intent to use it. But the rule is not violated until s/he enters the batter's box. And that's the truth - you could look it up.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Where the hell did "intent" come from in this situation? Intent is NOT part of the rule.

Either the batter entered the BB or not with an altered or non-approved bat.