ASA test question
 

Yes, I think better late than never.

Did we discuss ASA 2015 question 19 on this forum? If so, please tell me a key to search or a date. If not, please do, without stating the answer in the answer key, if you know it.

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.

As stated in the NFHS test thread, the answer is found in RS 51.

Correct answer is "e"...Umpires didn't get off the field quick enough! :D

ASA Test. This is still with us, now as #23.

To me, 4.6.c.1 and 4.6.c.3/4 are contradictory or at least inconsistent. The 4.6.c.1 says "all action stands", which seems to mean no outs can occur.

RS 51 does not really clarify if the home run pitch makes the discovery "after a pitch" or whether calling the unreported sub out nullifies the hit/run.

4.6.C.3 applies, answer is A

4.6.C is arranged in a progressive order

1. Anytime prior to a turn at bat;
2. During the US turn at bat;
3. After completed turn at bat prior to any qualifiers on protest are satisfied
4. After completed turn at bat after the qualifiers have been met

As long as the "B1" mentioned in answer a is the substitute B1 and not the original B1. According to 4.6.C.3 Effect 1 it is the substitute who is out. This is different than batting out of order where the player who was scheduled to bat is the one called out.

What difference does it make?

Words have meaning and as umpires we're supposed to be using rulebook language. Choice A is almost correct, and given that the test also offers choice D, which one is most correct?

The sub has to be out to nullify the hit/run.

If the rule said that the original fellow was out, the action was nullified and the sub was now in the game, then we would do everything exactly the same as we do now. No? (Except that the scorekeeper would put the star for the note on the out in a very slightly different place)

I really don't understand how anyone can actually read the rule and not come the correct answer

4.6.C: A substitute who enters the game without reporting is considered an unreported substitute

Since in the OP the unreported substitute has complete his/her turn at bat, subparagraph 3 applies:

When completing a turn at bat and is discovered
a. BEFORE the next pitch, legal or illegal
b. BEFORE the defense has left the field
c. BEFORE the umpires have left the field

According to OP, "c" applies so you go to the EFFECT:

1. The unreported substitute is officially in the game and ruled out. (B1 is out, nullifies the run)
2. All other outs that occur on this play stand (n/a in the OP)
3. All other runners will return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch (n/a in the OP)

BTW, the rule for 2015 reads the same as the rule for 2016

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.

Basically you have an reported substitute who finished their at bat when B1 should have batted and then appealed so we have Batting out of order B1 is out. The unreported Sub is now in the game as she has batted Illegally.

THis is how I view it by breaking it down.

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.

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.

Where did this come from?

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.

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.

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).

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 :)

OUCH !

Yes, the answer is straight forward to those well versed in discussions of the rules and some related basics; but not necessarily full of clarity as written.

And yes, I have to work on unreported sub rules between books.

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.

And my point is that you are not taking the rule into consideration when reading the scenario's answers.

A is the only answer which includes the correct progression of rule's effect of officially entering the US into the game as B1. That player must be entered into the game to be declared out. At that point, the previously US is, in fact, B1.

And no, I didn't write it :)

If B1 and B1's substitute are both wearing number 1 don't we have a violation of 3-6-D. :-)

I appreciate the idea that you're trying to tell Tom that B1's substitute became B1. But I don't think there is any formal nomenclature where B1 is the first batter in the lineup. It's just a test taking and play describing shorthand. In other sports with similar schemas they generally refer to the substitutes with a different number.

B1 is a simple position indicator, nothing more.