What do you have... Strange play

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

One person doesn't make it a choir. As much as I dislike the case ruling, I'd follow it in a game. I couldn't justify anything else. It's never happened to me, but I could see it happening considering how we tend to signal our blocks/PC fouls around here.

And the blarge has NOTHING to do with this play at all. Trying to make it so appears somewhat ignorant, IMO. There are plenty of times opposite signals could be given and we have to decide between the two -- the blarge just isn't one of them, BY CASE PLAY.

This is kinda the point I was trying to make. The ONLY reason the blarge play can be a double foul is because there is a case play, not because a signal is irreversible.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is kinda the point I was trying to make. The ONLY reason the blarge play can be a double foul is because there is a case play, not because a signal is irreversible.

I don't think anyone was arguing that, though.

I think this play could involve the C and T talking, although if I was the T and the C called a charging foul (not team control, since it's during a throw in), I would let it go. If asked, I would support the call, saying that the ball was available to the throw-in team, whether or not I'd started the count.

There is such a thing as a punishment fitting the crime and calling an intentional technical foul here does not seem to fit the situation, at all.

Personally, I do not know why the ruling bodies cling to the notion that the ball is dead between the goal and the ball being made available to the teams. Changing this would only change one thing, in my mind -- the right for the scoring team to call a time out in this interval and changing that wouldn't break my heart in the least bit.