Quote:
Originally Posted by cdaref
I can't explain it.
BUT I can say that it does not mandate that preliminary signals are irreversible. I think the only way to understand 4.19.8(C) is to think of the situation where both officials steadfastly insist their call is correct and there is no other way to resolve it. Otherwise it doesnt make sense.
What I refuse to do is read into an already whacky case play an even whackier new RULE: that preliminary signals now are mandatory and unchangable and there cannot be any deferring. I dont think 4.19.8(C) dictates that.
|
Well, it does dictate that in this ONE situation. It is not about insisting one is correct or who had a "better" look. Both officials saw what they felt was good enough to blow the whistle but they disagreed. For them to even come to differnet conclusions implies that it was a pretty close call. For one to change/defer means that one official effectively overrules the other. You also can't decide which happened first because it is the same act.
Like it or not, NCAA-M and NFHS say that once the officials signal with opposite calls in a block/charge, it is too late for either to change...with an exception for being in the restricted area.