I know what book that's from. It wasn't Longfellow.

One thing that makes me question this is 2.6. When the conflicting signals are a foul and a violation, obviously something has to give, so the officials are directed to decide which occurred first. This tells us that one official's signal is expendable.

Nfhs
 

Federation you have to report both and go to the arrow on a missed basket. If made count it and give teh the non scoring team for an endline throw in...

Plain and simple, that is the correct way to do it in HS, anything else in wrong.

This is the key. Who says you have to report anything? Haven't we all made a fist, but then just called the out of bounds? When does it become binding? The C has started his PC signal when he sees the lead come in with an emphatic block signal. His hand barely touches his head, and he was kinda shaky on the call in the first place. He scratches his head and gives up the call to his partner. At what point would it be too late to turn back?

I view the case play as a last resort.

Sure, and hopefully it will be a PC. A player only looses LGP by stepping on the sideline...they don't become a free-for-all target for a collision. If the call depends on LGP, it is a block since they don't have LGP. If it doesn't depend on LGP, it is a PC foul. (I know I may be in the minority on this, but being right is not alway easy :D ).

In this case (even if you disagree with my opinion on LGP/OOB) it is a discussion over a matter of rule, not judgement. In that case, the discussion and a single call is warranted.

Only because they are two different acts/infractions, not two opinions of the same act/infraction.

For the record, let's say the call does depend on LGP. And let's say that the call in the case play does, as well. This makes the two plays the same other than the line being involved somewhat removes the gray area. I'm not sure whether your post helps my argument or hurts it.:D

He always needs more, no matter what. You're wasting your time discussing anything with him. Ignore.

I don't know it. Got a hint? I did a search and it says "author unknown".

I don't know either, but I do know that your argument is so poor that nothing much could hurt it.

Again, the rule is clear. If you think the rule (throught the case play) is also "wrong", submit a proposed rule / case change to the FED (probably through your local state).

After further research, I realize I was wrong. :(
While it seems to be derived from the Bible, it is not a direct Biblical quote.

I promise you...
 

in that scenario, each coach is going to see the call that benfits them and unfortunately, this is one of the rules that coaches tend to know. I've had it happen to me and my partner gave it up to me. The penalized coach knew the proper way to report that and he chewed us for not doing it properly. We always discuss the dreaded blarge in our pregames and most of the time we all agree to do it by the book. If I had my way all the time we would do it by the book every time.

And this, I think, is why the rules committee says to go with a double foul. As Jeff R alluded to previously, it's the method that provides the least resistance. Neither coach can complain that he got screwed by the results of an officials' conference.
It's also a strong incentive not to give preliminary signals too quickly.

If you go with the double foul both coaches will complain that they were screwed by the lack of a conference. This was my idea all along. One official gave a signal too quickly, and when he sees that his partner has something else, he may be perfectly content to yield to his partner's call.

If you pick one call, one coach is going to complain that one official got "overruled" by the other one.

By going with the rule book, you simply have to say "Coach, by rule we have to go with both." It's simple, quick, both coaches are equally affected, and you've got the rule to back you up. This last part is most important, because you're assignor is less likely to back you up if you have not applied the rule correctly in this situation.

Bottom line, the rule is clear and life gets much easier when you officiate by the rules. Ignoring them (or not knowing them) is what gets officials into trouble.