Double Whistle Situation
 

I'm lead. A1 goes up for a shot in the lane. I blow the whistle because I see a foul on B1. My partner blows his whistle at the same time and immediately signals jump ball. The problem is that I've got my fist in the air.

How do I handle that?

Get together and decide which happened first, and try to be aware of your partner's whistle so this won't happen again.

Which Happened First ...
 

Use statements like, "I saw, and agree with your jump ball call, but I'm sure that my foul came first", or your partner may say, "I saw, and agree that that was a foul, but I'm sure that my jump ball came first". Without acknowledging that you saw each other's call, there's no way to tell which happened first.

Sounds good to me. I originally typed "try to decide which came first" then left out the try. Right or wrong, in this situation the officials must decide which came first. There is no way to enforce both. ***




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

You see foul/held ball from time to time, you also see foul/travel. Nobody has done anything wrong when this happens. You just have to decide which came first. Normally it's a "travel into the foul" and the partner with the travel can come out with "First" and the travel signal as it's fairly easy for the partner with the travel to see the sequence of events clearly. With the foul/held ball, you've got to get together and determine which happened first.

Not sure what's up with the admonition to "try to be aware of your partner's whistle so this won't happen again". You've both got a call, neither knows what the other has. Blow the whistle, get together and come to the right decision.

Actually, what I see more often is, "the foul caused the travel". But then, maybe it depends on the different between JH girls, and varsity boys. wink, wink...

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

Fair enough. Though the foul usually is usually pretty obviously before, and a result of, the foul. I don't recall many double whistle on one of these where both officials don't have the foul.

But maybe I Just need to get out more. ;)

Okay, I can live with that. However, in this situation, if it's obvious that you have something very different than your partner, I don't think you should yield. Unless you are certain what your partner has came first. There is no shame in both of you coming out with something different, so long as you can quickly and smoothly resolve it.

If you're positive the foul occurred first, look at your partner and say, "I got it!, ...fouled before the jump."

...Or, did the defender prevent the release [held ball] and then make incidental contact ?

There are a coupla options here.

Upraised Open Hand?
 

Could this be one of the reasons the movement seems to be going toward closing down on a jump ball situation and stopping the clock with the whistle and an upraised open hand rather than going immediately to the "thumbs up"? Not sure.
I appreciate all the follow-ups responses to this thread so far.

This is covered precisely in...
 

case 2.6.B

I haven't really noticed a "movement" on this. But closing down is a really good idea. Bad things can easily happen on a held ball, especially if the players are on the floor. Close down. Be vocal. Encourage the players to stop play. Make every effort to be very obviously "right there".

What happens in your area, when it's just one-on-one, A1 and B1, and two officials signal two different fouls: a block and a charge?

In this case, there is no "this happened first". It's the same contact. One official judged it to be a block. The other, a PC.

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?

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.

Fixed it for ya.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

Except for 50% of the participants. Oh well. :)

That's why we get the big bucks. ;)

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?

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.

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.

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.

Not necessarily. :)

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

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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!.....

I agree.

By the reasoning of some others here, you should also call the foul/violation double whistles too. :rolleyes: 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.

Sorry, but I disagree with both of these sentences.

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.

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.

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".

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.

I only spoke to its possibility, not its frequency.

Okay, if we accept the idea (which I don't) that once a preliminary signal is made, we are obligated to stick with it, the question arises about when is a signal a signal? The official who has PC goes up with a fist, then starts back down with the hand before realizing his partner also has a fist up. Does the hand actually have to touch the back of the head to make it official, or what?

Don't over-think this too much. 99.73% of the time we're talking about two officials who have both come out and given a preliminary signal, without knowing the other official also had a call. Then it becomes obvious there are two calls.

If I'm reaching behind my head in your situation, I'm likely to have an itch back there. ;)

If PC official continues to team control or player control, partner drops his hand.
If PC official stops signaling after lowering his hand, he's giving it up.

You're kinda helping me make my point now. There is more than one way out of this little predicament. Back of my head has been known to itch.

M&M is right, this is about when both partners come out strong with opposing preliminaries.

I'm sure this is true, but the preliminary signal alone means nothing. This is especially true when your partner has the opposite preliminary signal. If you report a double foul in this case you know one is wrong. So get together and take your best shot.

For those that are new and/or working NFHS or NCAA-M, and unless you are working NCAA-W (can't speak for NBA or FIBA) this is such bad advice I don't know where to begin. First of all you've taken a bad situation, because the crew didn't "blow and hold", and now have turned it into a CF because you're deciding to do whatever you want to do. You'd be laughed right off the staff for that. Blarges happen, try not to let them, but if it does please don't complicate it and get it resolved how its supposed to be by the code of the game in question. I can explain a blarge to my assignor, I can't explain doing whatever I want to do.

Fixed it for you.

Question: Why do we form an angry mob about a backcourt interpretation but defend this issue with its direct contradiction?

You should check the current NFHS Officials Manual. The dual coverage area was dropped a couple of years ago.

So what does the rest of the forum think about pre-gaming blarge this way. i.e., primary responsibility. This is the way they addressed blarge in NY and NC. I'd have a very difficult time selling a double foul. I would rather avoid the blarge AT ALL COSTS. Jack BTW Wish everybody a Happy Thanksgiving. This forum has helped me so much in improving as an official.

Why? :confused:

Why? :confused:

Scrapper -

I am of the opinion that you can't have both a charge and a block on the same play. It is either one or the other. That is why I try to avoid it at all costs. It's kinda like a crocogator. That's an animal with the upper body of a crocodile and the lower body of an alligator. It's the meanest animal alive. You would be too if you couldn't take a S***!

While I am of the same opinion as you, the rules (case plays) tell us EXPLICITLY that when officials give differing signals, you assess both as a double foul. It doesn't matter at all whether I am of this OPINION or not.

And as for selling it, it's amazingly easy. You just start the sentence by saying, "Coach, BY RULE. . ."

Nice!
Thanks.

Let me put my pitchfork and torch down for minute and try to explain it. ;)

The backcourt interp we yell and scream about is just wrong from a rules standpoint. It is an (apparent) mistake by the NFHS. We'll jump up and down about it all day long, then actually go out and make that call at night, because that's what we're supposed to do. (And, of course, grumble while giving the signal...)

The blarge call is essentially a mistake by the officials. If the officials are doing their job properly, the primary official will be making the call. But what happens when two officials make conflicting calls about the same play? The case play tells us what to do - we have to report both fouls. It's not that the NFHS is telling us that both a charge and a block can actually happen at the same time, they're just telling us how to handle the situation where two officials have disagreed (for however short a time) on a call. I believe I read at one point the reason behind this is the theory that no official has the right to over-rule another's call. If everyone sees an official call a charge, then another official comes in and says, "It's in my primary - it's a block!", then that second official has seemingly over-ruled the first.

To me, it's no different than what happens when an official blows the whistle on a TO request when that team isn't entitled to a TO - you still grant the TO anyway.

In both cases, it's an official's mistake in some way, and the rules tell us what to do in those cases. I don't happen to agree - I would rather do it the way the NCAA-W handle it by the two officials coming together and coming out with one call. But, we don't get that option in NFHS rules. We can grumble about it all day long, then go out and make sure we get the call right in the first place so this never comes into play.

I had this twice last season (yikes!!!) in two different games. I was working with the same official who just refuses to refrain from giving preliminary signals whether it is in his primary or not and it got us in trouble on two bang, bang, got it sell it calls in my primary (lead). Regardless, I got both coaches together and did just what Scrapper suggested, "Coaches, by rule, we have a double foul situation..." In both games (one a playoff game), the coaches accepted the explanantion and we went on from POI. I pregame this every time no matter the level of game or experience of partner(s). This one official just refuses and gives a prelim on every call.

Scrapper, M&M - good explanation, thanks. I will add that to my pregame.

Walter, thanks. Will add that (hold up on prelim signal) to my pre-game as well.

Yes, its called "blow and hold" and its one of the best tools you can have in your toolbag.

I thought double foul (and Double T)= arrow?

POI (which might be arrow, might not)

So what's the POI on the infamous blarge? Lead has a PC and C has a block?

Rule 4-36. If there was team control, then ball is given to the team last in control at the time of the double foul.

Depends if there is a shot released prior to contact or not.

And yes, if the shot is released first, the basket will count and B will get the ball for an end-line throwin. (assuming it's made)

I may be corrected on this, but I believe a double foul in the case of blarge with an airborn shooter involved, it would void the basket - the ball would become dead immediately, with no team control, so you would go to the arrow.

Really? I thought a double foul voided the option for the basket to count.

Yep, you would be corrected on this. Normally you would be right that you would not count the basket after a player-control foul. But the case play 4.19.8 Sit C tells us it is not considered a player-control foul, it is instead a double foul, and if there is a basket, the basket is scored.

Yeah just looked it up. I stand corrected. Sorry if I caused any confusion. This is how we learn...

I know I'm beating this to death, but the word signal does not appear in the case play in question. A wrong signal is much easier to dismiss, in my opinion, than a wrong call.

I heartily agree with this. But the deal here is that while I may not overrule your call, and would not try to do so, if I have information which might lead you to change your call, I may, depending on the circumstances, choose to share this information with you. This is the case even when one official has made a signal and the other has not. If both officials have made a signal, and the two contradict each other, hopefully one will immediately yield to the other, or, if this is not possible, they can quickly confer.

We agree.

While I agree in principle, I disagree from a rules standpoint, according the NFHS. If I'm a coach and happen to know the rules (there really are a few of those out there), I would have a vaild complaint that only one foul was reported against my team, even though there were two fouls called.

Again, I agree with your principle, but I disagree with going against the rules because I (or you, or whoever) disagree with the rule.

I have one more question. This relates to the current Blarge-questions from coach thread. It is established that the case play in question does not specifically mention preliminary signals, but that seems to be the key to this case for those of you on the other side. In the OP of the other thread one official emphatically signals the PC, and the other simply has a fist up and makes no further signal. The second official saw the play as a block, was positive it was a block, but for whatever reason did not make the block signal. Why is he not obligated to report his foul?

He can go in and offer information and then allow the calling official to change the call to a block.

He can do this if he made no signal, but not if he made the block signal???
I don't follow this logic at all.

Most won't go in and offer anything unless it is an egregious error.

That's why it is important to pre-game! :D

Can only be a few reasons.

1. Because his partner came up with PC, the second official doubted his own call.
2. Because he didn't know how to administer the double foul.
3. Because he was afraid of something.

Not to dredge up a old thread but this was just released from my supervisor to his staff. I would say it is pretty definitive to how this is supposed to be handled on the Men's side of things...bolded emphasis mine.



December 16th, 2008
BLARGE: Block/Charge Double Foul Call



BLARGE: Block/Charge Double Foul Call

A drive or move to the basket may result in contact between the offensive and defensive player. While Refereeing the Defense is one of the pillars of basketball officiating, the official must determine if the defensive player has established initial, legal guarding position: two feet on the floor, in bounds, facing the opponent. The defensive player may move to maintain legal guarding position-laterally and backwards, just not forward or obliquely while also maintaining his own vertical plane (POV-Principal of Verticality). If contact does occur, then the basketball official goes to work.



The official must determine if the contact between A and B is illegal, a Charge by A or a Block by B, or incidental contact where no advantage or disadvantage or rough play to either player has resulted from this contact.



This discussion invokes Men's NCAA Rules and CCA Mechanics.



In the CCA Men's Basketball Officiating Manual, 2008-2009, Section 1.1 Block/Charge Calls p. 20 and Section 1.2 Drives to the Basket p. 21, jurisdiction to determine this call is levied upon the Lead official to have primary coverage if the contact occurs within the Free Throw Lane Lines; however, in case of double whistles, the outside official may take this call as he might have the best look.

Hence, there might be an indeterminate time frame where one official may call and signal "Block" while the other official calls and signals "Charge" nearly simultaneously. Hence, a "BLARGE" may result.



A Blarge is a Double Foul and must be processed as such. It would be incorrect to allow one official's call override or set aside the other's. A discussion of the four types of Blarge Double Foul scenarios: Player and Team Control, Team Control and the two examples of this type of double foul following a FGA where there is loss of team control, will be addressed in this essay.



To avoid a Blarge, by convention the Center and Trail officials are schooled to hold their preliminary signals. That is, they might sound their whistle and stop the clock to signal a foul, but do not add the block or charge signal...hesitating to ensure that indeed the Lead has come up with the call as affirmed by instant eye contact between the Lead and outside calling official. In some situations, it might be the outside official (Center or Trail) who takes this play. This mechanic should always be included in the official's Pre-Game Meeting to help ensure excellent communication, cohesiveness and crew dynamics.



Administering a Blarge:

Player Control, dribbling or moving (pivoting) and contact occurs: by rule in any double foul situation, both A is charged with a personal foul and B would be charged with a personal foul. The ball is administered at the Point of Interruption (POI) and would be given back to A at the spot nearest to where the foul was called , with no reset of the shot clock.



Team Control ( an airborne passer, an interrupted dribble play, a throw in, etc.) when player A makes contact with a defender B. Since A is still in Team Control when the double foul was called, again A would retain possession as they are still in Team Control. Under POI , the ball would be put in play at the closest spot to where the foul occurred, with no reset of the shot clock.



After the release of the ball for a FGA and a Blarge occurs, there is loss of Team Control. With no TC, if A's FGA is successful, POI B would entitle B to a throw in from a non-designated spot along the end line.



If the FGA is not successful and a Blarge occurs after the release, since there is no TC, administration of this double foul would call for the Alternating Possession (AP) arrow-POI-- at a designated spot nearest to where the foul occurred, with a reset of the shot clock.



Please refer to the 2009 NCAA Basketball Rule Book: 4.53.1.d for POI, 4-3.3.6 for Team Control and 7-5.8,9 for Double Foul POI indications. Also, please review the 2009 NCAA Basketball Case Book, p. 39 A.R. 95 for Double Foul play administration and pp. 69, 70 A.R. 172 for Blarge specific plays.



Blarge Management Key Points: Have a thorough pre-game. Outside officials hold preliminary signals. Know the various scenarios for double fouls. Work for consistent communication and optimal crew chemistry and dynamics.

Eye: Excellent post. Pre-gaming how the crew will handle crash situations is critical. Having officials hold signals and give calls to primary coverage official is how it has been driven home by the supervisors I have.