Question?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

4.19.8 SITUATION C: 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. RULING: Even though airborne shooter A1 committed a charging foul, it is not a player-control foul because the two fouls result in a double personal foul. The double foul does not cause the ball to become dead on the try and the goal is scored. Play is resumed at the point of interruption, which is a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along the end line. (4-36)

Does there have to be a shot and/or an airborne shooter for this case to apply?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does there have to be a shot and/or an airborne shooter for this case to apply?

No, this is just to clearly indicate that the consequences of a PC foul are no longer valid when it turns into a double foul.....the basket counts if it goes. Even without the shot, it is no longer a PC foul and will be resumed at the POI as if it were a player without the ball that was part of the double foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does there have to be a shot and/or an airborne shooter for this case to apply?

Now you're overthinking it.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, this is just to clearly indicate that the consequences of a PC foul are no longer valid when it turns into a double foul.....

Just to clarify (I'm sure Camron already knows this), the reason the consequences of a PC foul no longer apply is that it is not a player control foul at all. By definition, a player control foul is a COMMON FOUL committed by the player in control of the ball. But a double foul, by definition, is NOT a common foul. Therefore, the charge committed by the ballhandler cannot be a player control foul. So the ball does not immediately become dead if the try has already been released.

Hope that makes sense.

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

So getting back to your previous post, why is it OK for the NCAA women officials to get together and discuss play and NOT NFHS?

I agree with not giving the preliminary signal too quickly!!!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

So getting back to your previous post, why is it OK for the NCAA women officials to get together and discuss play and NOT NFHS?

I agree with not giving the preliminary signal too quickly!!!

Because that's the way the NCAAW powers-that-be want it handled.

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Because that's the way the NCAAW powers-that-be want it handled.

I don't want to sound like an a55 and question you, but where are you getting this information from? And why is it different in NCAA Men?

[Adam]

I'm just repeating what I've learned from NCAA refs who frequent this board. Hopefully one of them will answer.
As for why it's different than NCAA Men. Simply because they have different governing bodies who apparently view this issue differently.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

I don't want to sound like an a55 and question you, but where are you getting this information from? And why is it different in NCAA Men?

Because the Men's side could give a damn what the Women's side does. There are different rules, mechanics and officiating philosophies on both sides. Why is this any different?

Peace

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Because the Men's side could give a damn what the Women's side does. There are different rules, mechanics and officiating philosophies on both sides. Why is this any different?

Peace

Rut: I understand what you are saying about different rules, mechanics and philosophies between the two sides. IMO, what Snag is saying is that for NCAA women, if “blarge” occurs, officials would get together and determine the correct ruling - correct? In the same sense, if high school or NCAA men's officials get together on "blarge" and try to determine which foul (block or charge) occurs first, are they misapplying the rules because BY RULE it should be called a double foul?

IMO, it seems like this should either be called a block or a charge. There should be some sort of universal ruling or consistency to it. I just don't understand and know why they should be called any different (regardless of NFHS, college men or womens). I wish I can find a case play in the 2008 NCAA Men's and women's rulebook but can't. Could someone enlighten me and direct me case plays in the previous NCAA rule book?

Thanks

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

Rut: I understand what you are saying about different rules, mechanics and philosophies between the two sides. IMO, what Snag is saying is that for NCAA women, if “blarge” occurs, officials would get together and determine the correct ruling - correct? In the same sense, if high school or NCAA men's officials get together on "blarge" and try to determine which foul (block or charge) occurs first, are they misapplying the rules because BY RULE it should be called a double foul?

They apply the rule based on interpretation. The Women's side decided to handle the situation differently. It is that simple. Do not make this too complicated.

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

IMO, it seems like this should either be called a block or a charge. There should be some sort of universal ruling or consistency to it. I just don't understand and know why they should be called any different (regardless of NFHS, college men or womens). I wish I can find a case play in the 2008 NCAA Men's and women's rulebook but can't. Could someone enlighten me and direct me case plays in the previous NCAA rule book?

Thanks

It really does not matter what you or I think. The governing bodies have the right to do what they want and apply rules the way they want to. Whether you or I agree with it is not the issue at all. And you are not going to find rulings in the rulebook anymore for the NCAA, they created a casebook. They took all the accepted rulings out of the rulebook.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

IMO, it seems like this should either be called a block or a charge.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

In practice, it probably happens more often than not.

Just do it, and don't make a big production of it. One guy walks away from the call. (was it ever really there?) It's really a non-issue the vast majority of the time.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Just do it, and don't make a big production of it. One guy walks away from the call. (was it ever really there?) It's really a non-issue the vast majority of the time.

Except for two things.
1. It's the incorrect way to do it, by rule.
2. A lot of coaches know this, and it would be my luck that the one time I did it the coach would know the rule and my assigner would be all over my ***.
3. Integrity.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Except for two things.
1. It's the incorrect way to do it, by rule.
2. A lot of coaches know this......
3. Integrity.

1. I think either way is okay by rule, depending on the details of the situation.

2. Skeptical about this one.

3. I don't see that as an issue here. I really don't consider my idea here to be
anything shady.


One more thing. If you do go with a double foul here, how is it reported? Does one guy report the double foul or does each one report his own call?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

1. I think either way is okay by rule, depending on the details of the situation.

Not really. If officials signal opposite calls, then you are stuck. No one is talking about creating this situation if there is proper communication. But you cannot just look the other way. This is why both officials should not be signaling.

Originally Posted by just another ref

2. Skeptical about this one.

You would be surprised. But it is not during the game you have to worry about. After the game when they call your supervisor or the interpreter, then they will see you screwed up. And it will not be the coach that had the foul called in their favor either.

Originally Posted by just another ref

3. I don't see that as an issue here. I really don't consider my idea here to be anything shady.

It would be if you do not follow the rule. This is not a judgment call, you make this mistake you have only one option in Men's and NF Rules. It would be like calling an intentional foul and not awarding the proper foul shots.

Originally Posted by just another ref

One more thing. If you do go with a double foul here, how is it reported? Does one guy report the double foul or does each one report his own call?

Each official reports their foul. You do not pass off fouls to report.

Peace