[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is a legitimate question. As someone correctly pointed out the word blarge does not appear in the rules. BUT, the word signal also does not appear in the case play which is applicable here, but rather the wording says, one official rules on thing and the other official rules the opposite. Some say that in this case making a signal constitutes making a ruling. This is a widely held point of view, but sometimes, as in your case, the question comes up as to what constitutes a signal. Also, it is my impression that some officials will avoid a blarge at ALL COSTS. Specifically, if they (properly) withhold their preliminary signal and see their partner come out quickly with the signal opposite to the one that they would have had, they will walk away from the call, no matter how strong their conviction on the play. In short, this is a mess.

You realize that the case play in question has been in the casebook for over 20 years (at least since I have been officiating). So if this was not clear, then you would think the NF or the NCAA or both would change their language to reflect the position you always seem to take here. It would be very easy to just change the wording or clarify what is meant. But for some strange and unusual situation, that has literally never happened. I wonder why?

Peace