I was doing a varsity tournament game on Tuesday. My partner and I had a call that all of us hope that never happens to us, but can. I thought it would never happen to me but it did.

I was the trail, my partner was the lead official. We had play were A1 drives to the basket and the defender B1 comes up to stop him. Just as the two players meet, I see the A1 push off and clear out the defender with is arm. Because of that action I am signaling a PC foul. My partner did not see the arm and called a block at practically the same time. Because both of us had signaled already, we come together and decide to go with the a double foul. Team A had the arrow so they get the ball, but Coach B gets really upset (which he should have been) and tells us you cannot have that and that is impossible according to the rules.

Having said all this, I want opinions here. According to the casebook ruling 4-19-7C (except the shot part) we did what we could according to the rule, but is that how you would have handled the situation or would you have done something else. I bring this up also because we did have a discussion about the importance in rules, and no matter what we did, it would not have been a good situation. The coaches did not like the situation, we did not like the situation, but it happen. I really do not feel there is a right and wrong situation but I would like opinions so I can see how you would handle it if it happen to you.

BTW
 

Something very simular did happen like this at the NCAA Men's Regional final between Iowa St. and Michigan St. I believe.

Obviously it was a bang-bang play. Any call is gonna upset someone. I think you could have kept yourself out of trouble by picking one foul or the other and sticking with it.

I wasn't there of course, but I think you could really sell the offensive push and go the other way with the ball. If your partner was adamant about the block, then you have a problem. :)

This is a good topic to cover in your pregame.

Now, Here is one of my favorite situations.You might ask yourself,How can someone like a situation like this!The answer is, I am sure of one thing in a situation like this one of these officials has to come out STRONG!! From my own experience when I had a play like this,I wont touch it if it is not in my area.Also, it better be coming at me.And 95% of the time when I am placed in this situation my partner is not refereeing his or her area! Again,the official responsible for that area should have the better angle.The last thing I would have done is call a double foul.Remember officials trusting your partner is crucial in this business.And being honest enough to admit in a second that you have no business making that call! Selling a call like this one when it is your call is the sign of a official who is in the game!Last but not least get it right! get the ball back in play and move on ASAP.

Rutledge and his partner made the right call. You have no choice but to call a double foul. When each official signaled at the same time, each coach thought he was going to get a call. Two fouls have been called. You can't erase either of them. A double foul was and is the correct call.

This did happen in the MSU-ISU regional championship game last year. The U1 and U2 talked about it and tried to come up with one foul. But the referee, Curtis Shaw, put a stop to the nonsense and made the crew go with the double foul. There were plenty of questions after the game about how two different officials saw two different things. But there were no question as to whether a double foul was the proper way to handle it or not.

The larger question is how this happened. Did either official stop the clock with a raised fist prior to giving a preliminary signal? Was the proper eye contact made? I wasn't there but if I had to guess, I would say the answer to both questions is no. Too many HS officials don't stop the clock properly when making a PC or block call. They go directly to the preliminary signal. Incidentally, that's what happened in the MSU-ISU game too.

WOW a BLARGE! was this a 2 or 3 man crew? if it was a
3 man crew this could very easily happen as both of you are on the same side of the court if you and your partner got
together and couldn't decide which happened first then you made the only call possible. However if this was a 2 man crew my only question is who was watching off ball? If the drive strted from the leads side the trail should have been watching off ball and would have never seen the PC. If the drive started from the trails side the lead should have been looking off ball and wouldn't have seen the whole play to call the Block. Even though the play ended up in his primary
he should have given the trail first chance to make this call. But still even if this happens in a 2 man crew if both of you get together and can't figure out which happened first then this is the only option left.

Where exactly did the foul occur. Was it in the paint? If so, was it in an area where your partner was in position to officiate? In any matter, before making a quick signal as to what foul you have, the best action to take is to signal a foul and make eye contact with your partner before signaling player control/block.

2 Person
 

Unfortunately it was 2 person. The play started in my area but started going toward his area. I probably would have never signaled a thing if it was not on the boarderline of both areas. The call was on his side of the court, but the play started above the 3 point line, and the contact occured right at the FT line extended. That is the main reason I believe we both had whistles.

I will also say this, we should have been doing 3 person. Because this is a Class AA (Big School class) tournament and the play is awfully fast. It happen so fast that we both got caught. One of the teams is consistently one of the better programs in the state and at one time played in the State Semifinals against a team that eventually went on to basically compete for the National Championship according to the USA Today. Some of the players from their opponents are now on the University of Illinois team (Frank Williams, Sergio McClain, Marcus Griffin). The game is just to fast in many cases for 2. And with me doing more 3 person than 2 person, I many times felt a step behind.

BktBallRef,

I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree with ya. :) Just because each coach "thought he was going to get a call", should not be a factor here. The play left the trail official's area and he stayed with it. He made a tough (player control) call that should have stood. The lead's view was blocked and he didn't see the arm. End of story. Once Rutledge communicated that to him, his call (the block) was not a factor.
In my pregame, I make sure my partner and I discuss the double whistle. Somebody has to give. I just can't see calling a double foul in this situation. That really has the appearance that the crew can't decide which call to go with so they go with both.
Good luck to all this season.

Then I guess we just disagree. Rut said, "My partner did not see the arm and called a block at practically the same time." That implies to me that the calls were simultaneous. Did both players foul? Sure sounds like it. Even if the defender didn't have a guarded position and blocks, the offensive player can't push him off. There's absolutely nothing wrong with calling a double foul in this sitch.

I again refer to the MSU-ISU game. In that game, we had a block-charge call. On that one, obviously somebody missed it. But in this play, both players committed fouls. I think you make it even worse by trying to cancel one.

Rut,
I would say that you guys handled it perfectly. Once
you've both come out strong with different prelim
signals you have to go with the double foul, there's
just no other there way to do it fairly because as you
know it is covered in the case book.

In my humble opinion, one official has to concede to the call of the other one. In situtations like this, I make it a point to walk away from a conference with my partner(s) with one or the other call standing. Coaches, fans and all other observers have learned to accept officials' judgments. They are less inclined to forgive competing egoes.

Based on your description of the situation, my instincts tell me the PC foul would stand. A1's outstretched arm would probably come into contact with some part of B1 prior to B1's body coming into contact with A1. But of course, I wasn't there and neither was my ego.

Although I usually am against the calling of double fouls, this sounds like a situation is which it may be justified. This call is different from the charge/block where one official calls the charge and the other calls the block (in which case, I believe there never should be a double foul call). In the case of the charge/block, I believe you cannot have two interpretations of the same act prevail.

In this case, however, you have two separate acts. The defender committed a block at the same time the offensive player pushed off with his arm. The two fouls are not mutually exclusive. It sound to me like the right call was made.

AAARRRGH! Now I'm agreeing with Rut! What's next - a candygram to Yaws? ;)

Mark I absolutely agree. The only call you can have in this situation is the double foul. If one official gives it up to the other, you run the risk of the coach or coaches seeing one official being overruled by his/her partner. Think about what that sets up for the rest of the night every time the official who got overruled makes a call. Don't make a bad situation worse. The rule book sets this as a double foul. However, I agree with all of the other comments made so far that say this is a situation to be talked about in pre-game. Let's face it, double whistles happen. It is the responsibility of both or all three officials to know what to do when they occur.

VERY GOOD discussion. However, one thing keeps running through my head..."What is our main objective?" To preserve our egos or get the call right?

I CAN understand arguments on both the double foul side & the getting together to figure out what happened first side. I believe in trying to get the call right no matter how my partner or I look.

Maybe an unpopular axiom, but just thought I'd throw my two cents in.

Mark,

I agree with you IF the fouling acts happened at the same time. But if the Trail (in this scenario) sees a push-off clearly (in his mind) before the blocking contact, then I see no reason not to go with the PC. That assumes, of course, that the Lead didn't see the pushing arm and concedes to his partner. The PC occured first, the block becomes "incidental", and an easier solution can be sold. As Rut described it, though, it may not have been possible to say that the push happened first, since it happened "just as the two players meet." In that case, the double foul sounds like the right call to me, given that both refs signaled differently.

[Edited by Todd VandenAkker on Nov 27th, 2000 at 03:56 PM]

Indy,

If you get together with your partner & he says "I saw both
fouls, mine came first" then you should go with that. I
think in this case both guys saw only their foul so they
could not agree on what came first. This is slightly
complicated by the fact that they both came out strong,
but as you say this is secondary to "getting it rigt".

[QUOTE}
Originally posted by Indy_Ref
VERY GOOD discussion. However, one thing keeps running through my head..."What is our main objective?" To preserve our egos or get the call right?

I CAN understand arguments on both the double foul side & the getting together to figure out what happened first side. I believe in trying to get the call right no matter how my partner or I look.

Maybe an unpopular axiom, but just thought I'd throw my two cents in.

The proper thing to do is to get the call right. If the whistles are simultaneous and two fouls occurred, then a double foul is the right call. When both officials signal that prelim and they are different, it just seems to me that you have no choice but to call a double foul. If one official thought the other foul occurred first, he wouldn't have made the call that he did, now would he?

Isn't this fun? ;^)

When both officials signal that prelim and they are different, it just seems to me that you have no choice but to call a double foul. If one official thought the other foul occurred first, he wouldn't have made the call that he did, now would he?



I think that Todd's point is that one ref could possibly see both "fouls", while the other saw only one. Each made the correct call from the perspective they had at the time. But the one who saw both is the only one who got it right. If one ref sees both actions and knows for a fact that the PC preceded the block, the ref who only saw the block should, upon discussion with his partner, be able to allow the partner to make the proper call - PC.

BTW, when the whistles occur should be irrelevant - the whistle is not the act, it is merely the notification that the act occurred. Regardless of the timing of the whistles, the refs must get the proper order of the actions that led to the whistles.

Somewhere in the replies is the question "Where is the proper mechanic" A fould occurs, fist up move and bird=dog. there should have been no preliminary signal as to Block or PC if officials realized they had a double whistle. As described, the trail would have had this call all they way and the Lead was (or should have been off-ball)
It would seem that Rut should have taken the bit in the mouth and made the call that would have been right,,PC going the other way. A double foul in the situation does not seem appropriate. (How can you block me if I am pushing off??)
I think that in any double whistle you have to call something and a double foul is NOT decisive!!

My point wasn't that the whistles were simultaneous, but that the fouls were simultaneous. We associate the whistles with the fouls. You're talking semantics.

People keep throwing things into this scenario. Neither official indicated that they saw both fouls. Since neither saw both fouls, you have no choice but to call a double foul. If an official says I saw both fouls and the PC or the block occurred first, then you go with that. But that wasn't the case. These guys made the right call given the circumstances. If you don't know which foul came first, and they didn't, you HAVE to call it a double foul.

I fail to see why that is so difficult to grasp. :^(

How can you push off against me if I block you? How do you know that the block didn't occur first? You don't. If the player is airborne, B moves underneath and creates contact and then A pushes with his forearm, the block came first. The point is that neither official knew which foul occurred first, if indeed one did occur before the other. That's why it's a double foul.

4-19-7a
A double personal foul is a situation in which two opponents commit personal fouls against each other at <b>approximately</b> the same time.

Not exact same time but approximately the same time. To accept some of these interpretations would mean that you would never call a double foul.

<b>Here is the NF interpretation of this play</b>

4.19.7C. Play:</b> A1 drives for a try and jumps and releases the ball. Contact occurs between A1 and B1 after the release and before airborne shooter A1 returns to the floor. One official calls a blocking foul on B1 and the other official calls a charging foul on A1. The try is successful. <b>Ruling:</b> Even though airborne shooter A1 committed a charging foul, it is not a player-control foul because the two fouls result in a <b>double personal foul.</b> The double foul does not cause the ball to become dead on the try and the goal is scored. An alternating-possession throw-in results.

If you want to discuss the merits of a double foul, this sitch is even less of a double foul than our play. But it's still a double foul. Can you have a block and a charge on the same play? I don't think so but neither official is going to change his mind. In Rut's play, each player definitely fouled. Again, no choice but to call a double foul.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Nov 29th, 2000 at 12:59 AM]

It's often dangerous to say "no choice" in these discussions, since we weren't there and can only go by someone's written description of a situation. If the fouling acts did indeed occur simultaneously, or even approximately at the same time, then I agree that the call should be a double foul. But again, IF an official is certain that one foul preceded the other, then the two officials DO have a choice, and would generally have a much easier "sell" to explain that one act occured BEFORE the other, making the second foul incidental contact. Having one call vs. a double foul would be more "acceptable" to most people involved in the game, even if one party felt it should have been the OTHER contact that was penalized.

I am relatively new to officiating, but I really like the point here about stopping the clock appropriately first and making proper eye contact before signalling. That way, if there is a conflict, everyone doesn't have to know until the officials are ready to signal. I learn (both good and bad things) from veteran officials. Being new, I often humble myself and follow the lead of the veteran. With that, I always keep eye contact with my partner when a call is made. I guess it's the ego thing that many of my partners have had. Nevertheless, very interesting case.

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.

Double Whistle
 

This leads into a question of mine, which is, do you always look at your partner after you blow the whistle, before you signal? I feel like this would be the only way to catch a double whistle, if they are really exactly simultaneous. In a raucous gym, I can barely hear my own whistle, let alone my partner's if they are really simultaneous. So the only way to catch a double, would be to look up on every foul, before signalling. Do others do this? If not, how do you catch a double if the gym is noisy?

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.

By rule you are exactly right. Been awhile since I've worked 2 man, so I'm not exactly sure who had primary coverage. Don't let it bother you. It has happened to many of us. Learn from it and cover it in pre-game. Don't rush. Make eye contact.
Have a good season.

This is a great conversation piece. I especially like the term BLARGE. I think that word is an onatamiapeia (sp?). The word BLARGE sounds like a mistake.

I've seen this call before, while watching a game. Is it ever a BANG-BANG play! I'll mention what I think right now, and if you want, you can read the rest. I think it's a double foul, go with the arrow.

In BktBallRef's post, he mentioned that the crew chief came in and settled things. I think this is heads up officiating. The U1 and U2 took too long to decide. I'd also see that perhaps the clock wasn't stopped and the officials went right to the preliminary signal. That's why we *have* mechanics.

In PAULK1's post, he mentioned who was watching off ball. Perhaps I'm practicing poor officiating, but as trail, I'm going to follow that play into the key, especially if I anticipate a hard drive coming up.

Scottymel said it right when he said the right action is to call the foul and make eye contact first before a signal.

Keep in mind that the play happened on an area of responsibilty border. In my pre-game, I say that until it's *entirely* in the new area, the play remains in the originating area of responsibility.

BigDave mentioned that in his pregame he discusses a double whistle. I think what we had here was a double call, not a double whistle. A double whistle can translate into a single call, but a double call cannot be converted into a single call.

Someone mentioned not liking calling double fouls, but I think they're great. I know exactly how many I've called in my basketball officiating career. Four. In fact, one was last night at a mens league game. Both players said it was the right call. Mens league is different though in that they want to be able to do the NBA extra step, they want their own "quirky rules". We say ok.

walter mentioned to not make a bad situation worse. I don't know where the bad situation is. For this reason: this play is a case book play. I'm assuming the case book is written, or confirmed, by coaches just as the Fed rule book is written by coaches. That is how THEY want it called.

I'm assuming that in a BANG-BANG play, both officials sold the call. If so, I think getting together looks dumb. Double foul and move on. However, I do think you should get together and not worrying about you look. But in this sitch, the longer you stay talking, the worse off you are.

Dan_ref has it right when he said if one official saw both fouls and his happened first. I've done that before too - works very well.

I'll end this now. I was coaching a grade 9/10 women's team and we were in a gold medal game. My team was given a throw-in, after a TO, caused by a held ball, and we proceeded up the court. However, it should have been the other team's ball. We were into our offense and put up a shot. While in the air, the ref blew his whistle, said we have a correctable error, and awarded the ball to the other team at the previous throw-in spot. Of course, I go balistic. Wouldn't you? He then goes on to tell me that "there are 7 or 8 correctable errors." I told him there were 5 and this was not one of them. My point is that the rule AND case book tell us how to call parts of the game. When a point is covered in the book, that is the ruling! Period.

Todd,

You didn't rattle my cage. I simply pointed out that you took the last line of my post and applied it to a sitch where we know what foul occurred first. That was out of context. My comment was referring to the play where we don't know which foul happened first. I thought Rut's post was very clear on this. By taking the comment out of context, you changed what I had said. I just wanted to clarify it.

Tony

Juggling
Great summation of the various threads of conversation. With respect to Walter's comment, I have to agree with his assessment that this amounts to making the best of a bad situation. Certainly the rule book and case book allow for double fouls. But in many situations, it is not really a double foul that occurred, but the double foul must be called because two officials see the same single foul in two different ways. Clearly, double foul is the correct call and the book has provided the best way to deal with this situation. However, the situation is not likely to make coaches happy - they will both feel that one foul occurred and the other did not, and one coach is usually right. So you are dealing with a bad situation in accordance with the rules established by the NFHS, but that does not change the fact that the situation started out bad. We coaches would rather not have this occur, and I am sure most refs would prefer not as well. But once you get into this situation, make the right call and move on:) I think that was what Walter was saying and I agree.

From your description, the call was made on players outside
the paint, foul line extended on the opposite side from
the trail(you) coming at the lead.
If you were in your position near your sideline it sounds
like you followed the play too long.
I usually let the play go once the ball has moved past
the top of the key down towards the lead and concentrate on
the players on my side in case of a quick cut to the middle
and a pass.
However,I dont see how there could have been a block call
when you plainly saw the dribbler push off.
Oh well, good luck in the season.

The ball.......
 

was very close to dual area. I would disagree about letting the ball go because the other official might not be watching the ball, he is usually watching off ball until he realizes that the ball is in his area. I really do not know what was going on off ball, because I had players making moves up top. According to the stated mechanics, anything above FT line extended is the trails call. And that is what we had discussed in the pregame. But that is why there is a need to get rid of 2 person almost all together ad go to 3. This more than likely would have never been a problem in a 3 person game. The players are getting too fast and strong to use two officials for a game that had probably several D1 prospects on the floor.

My point was simply that you had two officials give signals on the floor; one for PC one for block. This is the bad situation I was referring to. At that point, I think you've got a tough road if you try to sell one over the other. One coach is going to think that one official overruled the other no matter how you explain it. The rule book gives you an out. Will it make everyone happy, probably not, but that's the rule. One thing I always cover in my pre-game is the double whistle especially on block charge situations. If we have one, let's make sure we have a fist, eye contact and go with whoever's primary area it is whether two or three person crews. If we need to get together and talk let's do it (i.e where did the play originate, etc.). Otherwise, non-primary gives up to primary and play on. In this situation, because of the actions of the officials, not saying who was right or wrong, double foul was the right call.

Walter.
 

Now let me ask you this. What if you cover it in the pregame and still you have a double whistle situation and neither of you notice the other blew their whistle? That is what happen, I did not hear his whistle, and he I think did not hear or see me with my arm up. We discuss this situation in pregame and I always do, but what happens if both of you just have a brain fart?

We've all been there!!! I still think that since both of you signaled different calls, you're really stuck. Reasonable people can take the same set of facts and reach different yet reasonable conclusions. One had a block and one had a PC. Double foul and get the game back moving as soon as possible.

Well,........
 

that is exactly what we did.

The main factor of this is what caused the contact. In this scenario, Rutledge has given us the kewy - the arm of A1 keeping the defender away from the play. Therefore, logic provides that it is an offensive foul and B should get the ball. In the NCAA tournament game referred to, the play was with two bodies hitting each other simulatneoulsy and without an arm or any other body part to delineate the point of contact. Here, it is clearly the arm which causes the contact.

The good news is that Rutledge did not let that type of foul go unpunished. Secondly, whomever is the R in this situation must step up and decide the outcome. Then, after the game, the two officials should review the tape and talk through the event.

Thanks Rut, for the interesting scenario.