Getting Ready

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

> 92 ?

96%

I am waiting to see which two are wrong. I have a feeling that one that was wrong was from the interpretations on the SUP website, though they changed a significant fact in the question (verse the case play). Not sure about the other one.

But for the fact that I am a nitpicker and have a good understanding of grammar, I would have easily missed 5 additional questions just because of their wording.

Though reading comprehension is important to understanding the rules, no umpire test should have "trick" questions that focus on grammar rather than content.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

96%

I am waiting to see which two are wrong. I have a feeling that one that was wrong was from the interpretations on the SUP website, though they changed a significant fact in the question (verse the case play). Not sure about the other one.

But for the fact that I am a nitpicker and have a good understanding of grammar, I would have easily missed 5 additional questions just because of their wording.

Though reading comprehension is important to understanding the rules, no umpire test should have "trick" questions that focus on grammar rather than content.

Good for you, I wish we could review right away while my thought process is still fresh.

[shagpal]

96% here too.

maybe we got same questions wrong.

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

96%

I am waiting to see which two are wrong. I have a feeling that one that was wrong was from the interpretations on the SUP website, though they changed a significant fact in the question (verse the case play). Not sure about the other one.

But for the fact that I am a nitpicker and have a good understanding of grammar, I would have easily missed 5 additional questions just because of their wording.

Though reading comprehension is important to understanding the rules, no umpire test should have "trick" questions that focus on grammar rather than content.

[Jake26]

I had a question on my instance of the test that, based on the wording, I think was intended to reference MechaniGram A in the CCA Manual, but there was no information about the location of any runners. So I made an assumption, and I suspect this is the one I missed.

[EsqUmp]

As suspected, one question's approved ruling reference had a majorly different fact than the question itself. If that reference is going to be used for the scenario in the test question, I guess that's fine although it wouldn't make much sense.

The other question now makes it possible to call out multiple runners for leaving prior to the pitch. I know it is a delayed dead ball, but when did they allow for multiple outs? Nothing in the rule book addresses multiple runnerS getting called out. Hmm...

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

As suspected, one question's approved ruling reference had a majorly different fact than the question itself. If that reference is going to be used for the scenario in the test question, I guess that's fine although it wouldn't make much sense.

The other question now makes it possible to call out multiple runners for leaving prior to the pitch. I know it is a delayed dead ball, but when did they allow for multiple outs? Nothing in the rule book addresses multiple runnerS getting called out. Hmm...

Can you be more specific?

[EsqUmp]

I can post the actual questions when I'm back on my computer. An iPod touch is not the place to try to copy and paste. The one question, quickly, said the defense had the option to call the runner(s) out for leaving early. The answer was true. The (s) makes for multiple outs or a blantantly grammatically inaccurate question.

[EsqUmp]

The other questioned referred to AR 9.2 I believe dealing with home runs and the catch and carry rule.

[Jake26]

Originally Posted by Jake26

I had a question on my instance of the test that, based on the wording, I think was intended to reference MechaniGram A in the CCA Manual, but there was no information about the location of any runners. So I made an assumption, and I suspect this is the one I missed.

Nope. I missed one about a base umpire always (my emphasis) chases a fly ball near the fence and near the foul pole. This is FALSE (I marked TRUE) because, I am told, a rotated base umpire does not chase fly balls down the line out of their area of responsibility.

So the real question is "A base umpire chases out of his area of responsibility." Frankly, I find this a bogus question as originally worded. But that's me.

[EsqUmp]

I missed that one last year. I heard that over 50% if the test takers missed it. That is the sign of a bad question. I help write our state test and we would scrutinize the he'll out of a question and figure out what the problem with it was. We certainly wouldn't repeat a trick question. That question was in my test this year too.

[Jake26]

Originally Posted by esqump

i missed that one last year. I heard that over 50% if the test takers missed it. That is the sign of a bad question. I help write our state test and we would scrutinize the he'll out of a question and figure out what the problem with it was. We certainly wouldn't repeat a trick question. That question was in my test this year too.

+1

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Jake26

Nope. I missed one about a base umpire always (my emphasis) chases a fly ball near the fence and near the foul pole. This is FALSE (I marked TRUE) because, I am told, a rotated base umpire does not chase fly balls down the line out of their area of responsibility.

So the real question is "A base umpire chases out of his area of responsibility." Frankly, I find this a bogus question as originally worded. But that's me.

Me too.