Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
On the contrary, if ANYTHING, ANYWHERE was written about what must be done because of a signal, I would be the first one in line.
|
Then what did you mean here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
I'm talking about something that says: From the desk of Mary Struckoff
re: caseplay 4.19.8c When and only when the two officials involved come out with conflicting preliminary signals in the play, both fouls must be reported. They may not confer and report a single foul.
If this exists, I'd like to see it, but it wouldn't change my opinion.
|
For the record, I don't recall if you've offered an alternative opinion on what exactly this case play is meant to cover if you don't think it covers what everyone else says it does.
Occam's Razor, as well as the "When it's you against the world" theory, make it pretty clear to me.
Now, if no one cares what should be done where you are, fine, just realize that your area would be isolated on this issue if that's the case.
I once had a fellow official question the ruling in a pregame. He had brought it up in disbelief after having been told by another official. When I showed him the case play, he conceded the point.
It's really clear unless you don't want it to be.