Hope this never happens again, but

[Todd VandenAkker]

Originally posted by BktBallRef What's the point in taking my post out of context? You applied my words to a situation that they were not meant for. If one foul occurred prior to the other, then obviously you have a choice. I never said that you didn't.

But the two fouls that were called in the original post appear to have been simultaneous without either oficial knowing if one occurred prior to the other. AGAIN, you have no choice but to call a double foul. I assure you that I am in no danger by making that statement. [/B]

BktBallRef,

Be calm, my friend. If I took your words out of context, my apologies. I certainly did not intend to do so, and thought my comments were appropriate to the context and contributed to the discussion. No need for defensiveness. From what I gather, we appear to be in agreement after all, since we are both saying that if the fouls occur simultaneously and each ref had the "opposite" call, then it's a double foul. You stated that when the two officials came up with simultaneous whistles and had different calls (and signals), then the only call that could be made was a double foul--at least, that's how I interpreted what you said. I was merely clarifying that, in my opinion, even with simultaneous opposite signals by the refs, they still had a choice to go with only the PC foul if that official knew it happened first and his partner deferred the call to him. Going with only the blocking foul would not be adviseable, of course, since it would be difficult (if not impossible) to argue that it happened FIRST, but the other way around is feasible. So, sorry again if I rattled your cage a bit. It was not personal, but just a part of the continued discussion.