Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
The NCAA RULE is the same as the NFHS RULE. If two officials signal conflicting fouls on a play, then the resolution is a double foul.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
A.R. 172. A1 drives to the basket and:
(1) The referee calls a player-control foul and an umpire calls a
block; or
(2) The referee calls a charge and an umpire calls a block.
RULING: This is uncharacteristic of a double personal foul where one official adjudicates the obviously committed fouls against two opponents.
(Men) In (1) and (2), the two officials disagree that the fouls
occurred simultaneously. In (1), the ball shall be awarded to Team A,
the team in control, at the point of interruption with no reset of the
shot clock.
(Rule 2-11.7.f, 7-4.1.d and 7-5.8)
In (2), the two officials disagree as to whether there was a charge
or a block, however, the ball was released by A1. Although there is
no team control while a ball is in flight, when the goal is successful,
play shall resume at the point of interruption by awarding the ball to
Team B, the team not credited with the score, at the end line with the
privilege to run the end line. When the try is not successful, play shall
resume at the point of interruption with the use of the alternating
possession arrow and a reset of the shot clock. (Rule 7-5.9)
|
This case play has things in common with the NFHS play but also goes into more detail about one thing which I think is significant.
"The officials disagree."
Obviously, this is the case originally, but if the officials can confer and one can convince the other of the proper call, there would no longer be a disagreement, and no need for the double foul call. Also, I think it is significant that the word signal does not appear in either play.