Double Whistle Situation

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

One official yields to the judgment of the other. A signal does not a call make.

I believe the Fed disagrees with you. Last I read, the correct ruling from the NFHS is that you are to report both fouls, and go with the arrow.

By using only one official's judgment, you are discounting the judgment of an official. From that point on, how can you be certain that the judgment of said official is accurate?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I believe the Fed disagrees with you. Last I read, the correct ruling from the NFHS is that you are to report both fouls, and go with the arrow.

By using only one official's judgment, you are discounting the judgment of an official. From that point on, how can you be certain that the judgment of said official is accurate?

The Fed also says, by definition, that a block and a charge cannot occur at the same time.

At any given time, how can you ever be certain that anyone's judgment is accurate?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The Fed also says, by definition, that a block and a charge cannot occur at the same time.

At any given time, how can you ever be certain that anyone's judgment is accurate?

I apologize for using approved rulings. The coaches in my area should be notified.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I believe the Fed disagrees with you. Last I read, the correct ruling from the NFHS is that you are to report both fouls, and go with the arrow POI.

By using only one official's judgment, you are discounting the judgment of an official. From that point on, how can you be certain that the judgment of said official is accurate?

Fixed it for ya.

[zm1283]

On a block/charge, the Trail shouldn't be doing anything except for keeping his fist in the air waiting on the Lead to make a call. Doubling up on something like this is pretty avoidable if you pregame it properly.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

*** Where I come from, there's no such thing as a blarge. One of these things also happens before the other.

Are there any other rules that are tossed aside where you are?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by zm1283

On a block/charge, the Trail shouldn't be doing anything except for keeping his fist in the air waiting on the Lead to make a call. Doubling up on something like this is pretty avoidable if you pregame it properly.

Not necessarily true; way to much of a blanket statement.

[mick]

We had a double whistle blarge the other night.
Partner and I had a block.
Defense coach had a charge.
We went with 'block' after a brief discussion.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Often, not always, if two officials have a whistle, one can easily yield to the other before making conflicting signals.

How? I'm going up with a fist, partner goes up with thumbs (or even an open hand). We've already let the ones who pay attention know we have conflicting reasons for blowing the whistle in a shared primary area.

Come together, talk about what happened first, go with it. It's no big deal.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I believe the Fed disagrees with you. Last I read, the correct ruling from the NFHS is that you are to report both fouls, and go with the arrow.

By using only one official's judgment, you are discounting the judgment of an official. From that point on, how can you be certain that the judgment of said official is accurate?

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Fixed it for ya.

Good catch. It was 3am here at the time. That's my, um, excuse. lol

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by mick

We had a double whistle blarge the other night.
Partner and I had a block.
Defense coach had a charge.
We went with 'block' after a brief discussion.

From that point on, how can you be certain that the judgment of said coach is accurate?

[jritchie]

Originally Posted by just another ref

One official yields to the judgment of the other. A signal does not a call make.

Then the official that yields, has to immediately T the coach for yielding on their foul and not the other way around! Not a good mechanic if you ask me!
Two different angles, two different looks. Sometimes you just get both, you try not let it happen, but when it does, the book covers it and it should be dealt with in that manner. Not just act like it didn't happen.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Come together, talk about what happened first, go with it. It's no big deal.

Except for 50% of the participants. Oh well.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Except for 50% of the participants. Oh well.

That's why we get the big bucks.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Are there any other rules that are tossed aside where you are?

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?