The Downside of Double Whistles

[jpgc99]

In addition to the comments above about what to do after a double whistle, I think it would be more beneficial to give training on how to officiate your primary coverage area, a secondary coverage area, and more importantly, each match-up on the floor.

If you have three officials appropriately covering each match-up on the floor, with an understanding of primary coverage and secondary coverage areas, you minimize unnecessary double whistles but ensure every play is covered adequately.

You are starting your training with a faulty premise, in my opinion.

[JRutledge]

I simply do not believe that there is anything wrong with double whistles. Often they are very good because they show that you are watching the same thing. But in the lane double whistles are common.

Peace

[Freddy]

ALL these responses are being forwarded. Thank you for those thus far given. Any more thoughts on the general topic of "Double Whistles" that haven't been expressed?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Freddy

ALL these responses are being forwarded. Thank you for those thus far given. Any more thoughts on the general topic of "Double Whistles" that haven't been expressed?

What about triple whistles...had one in my game last night. Two of us had #10, one had a different foul on #33. The one with #33 yielded, not because he was outnumbered but because the other two of us had the best views (and before he even know we had different players). There were at least 3 possible players to call the foul on for the play....multiple defenders collapsed on a shooter in the lane from different directions.

[BDevil15]

Heres my impression of double whistles as a coach.

Scenario A: Double whistle, officials look at each other, one takes charge and makes a call, other official puts his hand down, nods, and administers then next play while "take charge official" reports the foul. I move on.

Scenario B: Double whistle, officials look at each other, then they kinda shrug at each other, they may even have the same call but they don't know and they have a meeting to discuss what happened/whats next. I'm not only irritated but I have to wonder why someone cant just grab a pair and make a call. I don't care what is called normally, but I do care that someone knows what they saw and does so with authority, not because they drew the short straw.

Scenario C: Double whistle, one official indicates a block immediately and other official indicates a charge immediately, they get together and decide one official had a better look and make a call. Again, if you make a call, stand by it. If you call a charge and he calls a block and you did so with such emphasis that you signaled immediately, then stand by it. Id rather see a double foul than have one official talk the other into backing off of whatever they think they clearly saw.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BDevil15

Heres my impression of double whistles as a coach.

Scenario A: Double whistle, officials look at each other, one takes charge and makes a call, other official puts his hand down, nods, and administers then next play while "take charge official" reports the foul. I move on.

Scenario B: Double whistle, officials look at each other, then they kinda shrug at each other, they may even have the same call but they don't know and they have a meeting to discuss what happened/whats next. I'm not only irritated but I have to wonder why someone cant just grab a pair and make a call. I don't care what is called normally, but I do care that someone knows what they saw and does so with authority, not because they drew the short straw.

Scenario C: Double whistle, one official indicates a block immediately and other official indicates a charge immediately, they get together and decide one official had a better look and make a call. Again, if you make a call, stand by it. If you call a charge and he calls a block and you did so with such emphasis that you signaled immediately, then stand by it. Id rather see a double foul than have one official talk the other into backing off of whatever they think they clearly saw.

In B, it may be that there are two different things that happened. They need to figure out which happened first and it is possible that neither can know that without having the discussion.

In C, if one talks the other out of their call, they are not following the rules (NFHS or NCAA-M).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

In B, it may be that there are two different things that happened. They need to figure out which happened first and it is possible that neither can know that without having the discussion.

"I got a good look at your held ball but I had a holding foul right before the held ball occurred".

[Freddy]

To the extent that perhaps one or two might be interested, here's a PDF of the PowerPoint lesson our association trainer came up with. The perspectives of some of the responders to this thread contributed to some of the points he made.
Totally FYI. Feedback welcome, if any have any on anything.

Correct Link to Double Whistle Lesson PDF

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BDevil15

Here's my impression of double whistles as a coach...

Do double whistles, to some coaches, have a sort of "confirmatory" effect? "Well, if they both saw it, it must have happened that way"? Or no? Or is that to general to deserve an answer one way or the other?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Do double whistles, to some coaches, have a sort of "confirmatory" effect? "Well, if they both saw it, it must have happened that way"? Or no?

Some (but not all) coaches are very observant. "Your partner had an open hand up for a violation, while you had your fist up for a foul".