ASA test question

[RKBUmp]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Read the question again, Mike:

19. In the bottom of the seventh inning of a tie game, an unreported substitute for B1 is batting and on the first pitch hits a home run.
Before the umpires leave the playing field, the defense notifies the umpires that B1’s substitute did not report. The umpire should rule:
a.) B1’s substitute is officially in the game, the run is nullified and B1 is declared out.
b.) B1’s substitute’s run counts because there is no penalty for an unreported substitute and the game is over.
c.) B1 substitute’s is declared out but the run counts and the game is over.
d.) None of the above.

Throughout, it is careful to distinguish between B1 and B1's substitute, yet answer choice a) says it is B1 that is out, not B1's substitute.

There is nothing wrong with the wording of the question. If b1's substitute is officially in the game, they now are in fact b1.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

There is nothing wrong with the wording of the question. If b1's substitute is officially in the game, they now are in fact b1.

Perhaps, but player designations generally do not change during the play scenario description. Given that everywhere else in that question and the various answer choices a clear distinction is made between "B1's substitute" and "B1" as being different players, there IS in fact, something wrong with the wording of the question, IMO. The test taker can reasonably conclude that answer a) is incorrect due to the wording, not due to lack of rules knowledge. In fact, the test taker most likely to view choice a) as incorrect is the test taker who thoroughly DOES know the rules. Hence, the wording of the rule is a problem.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

There is nothing wrong with the wording of the question. If b1's substitute is officially in the game, they now are in fact b1.

Exactly, you can only have one player occupying any single position at any one time.

I think y'all are overthinking the question looking for a booger.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Exactly, you can only have one player occupying any single position at any one time.

I think y'all are overthinking the question looking for a booger.

Disagree. See my reply above. It is not "looking for a booger"; neither is it "overthinking". It is applying the situation as described, with the answers provided, to the rule as written. It is not unreasonable to assume (and it is not overthinking to assume) that the question is written to make the point of exactly which player is out, B1 or B1's subsititute.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Disagree. See my reply above. It is not "looking for a booger"; neither is it "overthinking". It is applying the situation as described, with the answers provided, to the rule as written. It is not unreasonable to assume (and it is not overthinking to assume) that the question is written to make the point of exactly which player is out, B1 or B1's subsititute.

Quite plan, IMO. OP clearly states "unreported substitute for B1 is batting".

The substitute is officially in the game when discovered. That is the first thing that occurs. That means the player originally scheduled to bat is no long in the game. How are you going to rule someone not in the game out?

IMO, the question was provided to force the umpire to look into the rule (4.6.C) and determine which of the 4 possible effects is applied to the given situation.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Quite plan, IMO. OP clearly states "unreported substitute for B1 is batting".

The substitute is officially in the game when discovered. That is the first thing that occurs. That means the player originally scheduled to bat is no long in the game. How are you going to rule someone not in the game out?

IMO, the question was provided to force the umpire to look into the rule (4.6.C) and determine which of the 4 possible effects is applied to the given situation.

How do you rule someone not in the game out? You don't, which is why some would conclude choice a) is incorrect.

They didn't HAVE to state choice a) the way they did, and (as I said, and will repeat here) choice a) is the ONLY place in the entire scenario or answer choices where "B1" apparently means a different player than everywhere else... even choices b) and c) where she has also already been discovered and should (presumably) be referred to as merely "B1." But this is not a test in transitory nomenclature, it is a rules test.

Of course, threads like this treat poorly-written test questions as some kind of huge deal when they are generally merely an annoyance, but this question IS poorly written (or, perhaps as youngump states is intentionally written to trip up the test taker on a purely trivial nomenclature issue, in which case the question writer should be ashamed of themselves).

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

How do you rule someone not in the game out? You don't, which is why some would conclude choice a) is incorrect.

It is not incorrect. B1 is, by rule, the player officially in the game. I know this because the rule clearly states this to be true. The first sentence covers this in each scenario listed in the rule concerning unreported substitutes

They didn't HAVE to state choice a) the way they did, and (as I said, and will repeat here) choice a) is the ONLY place in the entire scenario or answer choices where "B1" apparently means a different player than everywhere else... even choices b) and c) where she has also already been discovered and should (presumably) be referred to as merely "B1." But this is not a test in transitory nomenclature, it is a rules test.

Again, and I obviously cannot say this enough, the unreported substitute IS B1. The OP states "unreported substitute for B1 is batting". BY RULE, the unreported sub is in the game and now is considered B1.

This is not a NFHS test. For year, ASA's premise is to get the umpires' collective noses into the book and to think, not to try and make them fail.

Of course, threads like this treat poorly-written test questions as some kind of huge deal when they are generally merely an annoyance, but this question IS poorly written (or, perhaps as youngump states is intentionally written to trip up the test taker on a purely trivial nomenclature issue, in which case the question writer should be ashamed of themselves).

Absolutely nothing wrong with the wording of this question. I understood it last year, I understand it this year and I would have understood it a decade ago even though the answer would have been different

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

It is not incorrect. B1 is, by rule, the player officially in the game. I know this because the rule clearly states this to be true. The first sentence covers this in each scenario listed in the rule concerning unreported substitutes



Again, and I obviously cannot say this enough, the unreported substitute IS B1. The OP states "unreported substitute for B1 is batting". BY RULE, the unreported sub is in the game and now is considered B1.

This is not a NFHS test. For year, ASA's premise is to get the umpires' collective noses into the book and to think, not to try and make them fail.



Absolutely nothing wrong with the wording of this question. I understood it last year, I understand it this year and I would have understood it a decade ago even though the answer would have been different

You're not getting my point at all, or are so wrapped up in defending the technical correctness of it (did you write this question?) that you are ignoring my point. The question writer clearly makes a distinction between "B1" and "B1's substitute" everywhere except in answer a). Everywhere. Even when "B1" could have been used.

I don't take the ASA test, so there I have no skin in this game. It is sloppily written. That is all.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Disagree. See my reply above. It is not "looking for a booger"; neither is it "overthinking". It is applying the situation as described, with the answers provided, to the rule as written. It is not unreasonable to assume (and it is not overthinking to assume) that the question is written to make the point of exactly which player is out, B1 or B1's subsititute.

In my experience taking ASA tests, half the time when there is an ambiguity in a question like this, they want it overthought and half the time they just made a mistake.