Double Whistle Situation

[Adam]

jar, unless you think the case play refers to a situation where two officials actually report their fouls independently of one another....

Prelim signals are to be handled with a double foul; explain to the coaches you're dealing with it by rule and move on. Neither one will be nearly as angry as the one coach who loses out if one official "yields" to the other.

[TravelinMan]

I think this is why calling outside your primary can get a crew into trouble, especially with a block/charge play.

Am I correct in stating that:

in 2 man - official who has play "coming to him/her" has primary responsibility to make the block/charge call.

in 3 man - official has block/charge call if play starts in his/her area. e.g., if drive to basket starts in T's area he/she has block/charge call all the way even though play finishes in Lead's area.

[jritchie]

That is why pre-game is so important to talk about these very situations.
Blarge = double foul, go with POI, ball back to offensive team or arrow if it's after release of shot, to start over and see if they do better this time.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jritchie

That is why pre-game is so important to talk about these very situations.
Blarge = double foul, go with POI, ball back to offensive team to start over and see if they do better this time.

Not necessarily.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by TravelinMan

I think this is why calling outside your primary can get a crew into trouble, especially with a block/charge play.

Am I correct in stating that:

in 2 man - official who has play "coming to him/her" has primary responsibility to make the block/charge call.

in 3 man - official has block/charge call if play starts in his/her area. e.g., if drive to basket starts in T's area he/she has block/charge call all the way even though play finishes in Lead's area.

There are shared primary areas, though. There's even one area shared by three officials that can (and does) lead to a triple whistle.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Except for 50% of the participants. Oh well.

If I can make half of the people happy, I'm having a good night.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Prelim signals are to be handled with a double foul;

This is the part that I think is unacceptable. If there was a rule which stated: "If two officials signal fouls, one with a block, one with a charge, a double foul must be called," then we would have no choice. BUT, as far as I know, no signal is, in and of itself, binding. Countless times over the years I have gone up with a fist, then modified this signal into something else, held ball, open hand for out of bounds, or whatever. Am I obligated to call a foul when this happens?
I think not.

[Adam]

So what situation do you suppose this case play deals with, then?
Are you saying all the rules interpreters who say, "Yeah, the rule says this, but we do it that way here instead," are wrong about the rule?

[walter]

If you have prelims, in NFHS, you have to penalize both. In NCAA women, you get together and make a decision. The NFHS casebook is clear. It is a double foul. In pregame, one of the things I always talk about is preliminary signals especially on block/charge situations to avoid this very situation. If you only have one prelim, there is no controversy. If however you have two different signals, player control and block, NFHS, double foul. Two reasonable people, presented with the same facts can come to two reasonable but different conclusions.

[walter]

Originally Posted by just another ref

We have had this discussion before. I don't consider this tossing aside anything.

4.19.8 C: ........ One official calls a blocking foul on B1 and the other official calls a charging foul on A1.

If this is the whole story, by virtue of this case play, you can go with the double foul call, even though by doing so, when you consider the definitions of block and charge, you acknowledge that one call is wrong.

If, however, the two officials get together and exchange information, one may back off from his call, and now we no longer have a double foul, so this stinker of a rule no longer applies.

How is this any different than when the lead whistles out of bounds and signals A's ball, then is told by the trail that A3 tipped the ball last and changes his call?

I can easily separate the two. The crash occurs at the same pace. The tip on an out of bounds could have come from a long way from the line where the ball went out of bounds and the calling official may not have seen the initial tip but did see the ball go out. Two very different things. In the crash, both officials saw the same crash from different perspectives.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So what situation do you suppose this case play deals with, then?
Are you saying all the rules interpreters who say, "Yeah, the rule says this, but we do it that way here instead," are wrong about the rule?

I suppose it deals with a case when neither official will back off from his call. Someone at the NFHS saw fit to include this as an option, even though by definition it is impossible.

[Skarecrow]

Originally Posted by jritchie

That is why pre-game is so important to talk about these very situations.
Blarge = double foul, go with POI, ball back to offensive team or arrow if it's after release of shot, to start over and see if they do better this time.

If we have a "blarge," we have two officials calling two fouls which are necessarily mutually exclusive....therefore, one of the officials got it wrong.....You can't have LGP, draw a charge, have a double whistle and then get penalized for having the LGP...the Key Operative Word is LEGAL....How do we penalize that kid for having a LEGAL guarding position? They need to confer and get the call right.....either he had the LGP or he didn't....If not, then he gets the block, and there is no Charge!.....

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is the part that I think is unacceptable. If there was a rule which stated: "If two officials signal fouls, one with a block, one with a charge, a double foul must be called," then we would have no choice. BUT, as far as I know, no signal is, in and of itself, binding. Countless times over the years I have gone up with a fist, then modified this signal into something else, held ball, open hand for out of bounds, or whatever. Am I obligated to call a foul when this happens?
I think not.

I agree.

By the reasoning of some others here, you should also call the foul/violation double whistles too. Where has all the common sense gone? It is frustrating to see that some officials would rather come up with some intricate by the book rulings rather than do what better fits the game.

Do what you want, but I won't go to the table to report 1 foul and have a partner go to report another.

Here's another double whistle that has ocurred:
With 18 seconds left in the game, offense is down 2 points, offense commits PC on a bang-bang play, at same time coach has requested TO, double whistle.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I suppose it deals with a case when neither official will back off from his call. Someone at the NFHS saw fit to include this as an option, even though by definition it is impossible.

Sorry, but I disagree with both of these sentences.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by walter

In the crash, both officials saw the same crash from different perspectives.

Exactly. The lead saw that B1 was late to the spot, and did not have LGP, so he signaled a block. But the trail had the angle to see that A1 pushed off with his inside arm and in fact this was the only contact, so he signaled PC. The two confer, the lead walks away, the trail reports the foul.