Double Whistle Situation

[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.

[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.

[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 Snaqwells

Sorry, but I disagree with both of these sentences.

The first sentence is definitely debatable, but how is it possible to have a block and a charge on the same contact?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The first sentence is definitely debatable, but how is it possible to have a block and a charge on the same contact?

From a strictly rules theory perspective, it's not.

However, 4.19.8 SitC tells us if two officials make two different calls on the same play (one a block, the other a charge), both fouls are reported, and it is considered a double foul. That is something the NFHS has determined for while, so whether or not we agree with this determination is not an option; we report a double foul.

Of course, the best way to avoid that situation is for the primary official to make the call, or for the two officials to not give a preliminary signal before making eye contact to determine who will sell the call.

[mick]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

From a strictly rules theory perspective, it's not.

However, 4.19.8 SitC tells us if two officials make two different calls on the same play (one a block, the other a charge), both fouls are reported, and it is considered a double foul. That is something the NFHS has determined for while, so whether or not we agree with this determination is not an option; we report a double foul.

Of course, the best way to avoid that situation is for the primary official to make the call, or for the two officials to not give a preliminary signal before making eye contact to determine who will sell the call.

Good call.
Two fists up and no discussion.
One foul reported.
From the stands and from the bench, it looks like "the officials nailed it".

[Adam]

Okay, I’ll cave on the very particular call of “charging”; but it’s very possible to have a defensive block and a PC foul on the same play.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Okay, I’ll cave on the very particular call of “charging”; but it’s very possible to have a defensive block and a PC foul on the same play.

Are you talking about the possibility of A1 perhaps "clearing out" with a forearm, at the same time B1 has not established LGP? If so, I suppose it's possible to have both, but I would think that's even rarer than the "blarge". I would also think there's a good chance one foul would happen before the other.

[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.