View Single Post
  #57 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 14, 2008, 07:13pm
just another ref just another ref is offline
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarecrow View Post
Yes, thank you...I am aware of the difference...I meant....Shouldn't we treat a blarge like a mulitiple foul, in that we shouldn't (IMHO) EVER be calling a multiple foul....We should see one foul by A1 before the other by A2, in order to not be killing Team A. I have never heard of anyone calling a multiple foul, even though the rule is on the books. Therefore, I ask, shouldn't we treat a blarge the same way? Not call it? See the block or the charge, and not call both? I can't believe that anyone teaches to call a blarge....that is the only way I am comparing the blarge with the multiple foul...I hope that makes sense, because I am confused at the philosphy of calling both....
Ok, I get the point. I don't think anyone wants to call a blarge. However, many feel that, because of the case play involving a blarge, we are obligated to do so if two officials give conflicting preliminary signals on the play. I have maintained that this is an option, but the preliminary signals do not set the call in stone. This thread is an example of this. One official signals a personal. The other signals a technical. OOPS! Somebody made a mistake. Same as when the blarge was called. Unfortunate, sure. But we get together and figure out which is right, as best we can, and go forward.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote