Simultaneous charge and block

[deecee]

they were right -- this is the dreaded blarge. there are ways it can be avoided, and they involve a pregame on the topic as well good crew communication and teamwork.

but the crew was right. The only thing is on a double foul it goes to POI unless the ball was loose.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by deecee

This is the dreaded blarge. There are ways it can be avoided, and they involve a pregame on the topic as well good crew communication and teamwork.

And it can get really complicated if the ball goes in:

4.19.8 SITUATION C: A1 drives for a try and jumps and releases the ball. Contact occurs between A1 and B1 after the release and before airborne shooter A1 returns one foot to the floor. One official calls a blocking foul on B1 and the other official calls a charging foul on A1. The try is successful. RULING: Even though airborne shooter A1 committed a charging foul, it is not a player-control foul because the two fouls result in a double personal foul. The double foul does not cause the ball to become dead on the try and the goal is scored. Play is resumed at the point of interruption, which is a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along the end line. (4-36)

And BktBallRef has recently given us some good advice on how do avoid the dreaded blarge:

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

If there's a double whistle, I raise my hand and you raise your fist, we come together and discuss. If there's a double whistle, I don't raise my hand and you raise your fist, we come together and discuss.

GaOfficial: Welcome to the jungle, I mean, the Forum.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

And it can get really complicated if the ball goes in:

4.19.8 SITUATION C: A1 drives for a try and jumps and releases the ball.
Contact occurs between A1 and B1 after the release and before airborne shooter A1 returns one foot to the floor. One official calls a blocking foul on B1 and the other official calls a charging foul on A1. The try is successful. RULING: Even though airborne shooter A1 committed a charging foul, it is not a player-control foul because the two fouls result in a double personal foul. The double foul does not cause the ball to become dead on the try and the goal is scored. Play is resumed at the point of interruption, which is a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along the end line. (4-36)

And BktBallRef has recently given us some good advice on how do avoid the dreaded blarge:

Actually, I believe the quote from BktBallRef refers to when one official has a violation and the other has a foul. The majority of the board here says that when the officials in the above case play give conflicting preliminary foul signals they are obligated to report both. A few of us disagree. A preliminary signal is not binding in any other situation, why should it be here?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A preliminary signal is not binding in any other situation, why should it be here?

Because the case play says so.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Because the case play says so.

Actually it doesn't. The word signal does not appear in the case play.
But following this line of reasoning, here is a question. Has anyone here ever reported a double foul when only one official made the preliminary block/charge signal and the other went up with just the fist and waited?

You think to yourself: Oh, my gosh! He called what?? Nothing to do but salvage a split.

Or in this case is it acceptable for the official who did not make the signal to provide information to the official that made one (He cleared out with his inside arm, etc.) and allow him to change his call?

[South GA BBall Ref]

Sounds like a situation I was involved in a few years ago in the State Finals. We reported the double foul but went with AP arrow instead of POI (offense with ball)

Welcome GA Official

[eyezen]

Originally Posted by South GA BBall Ref

Sounds like a situation I was involved in a few years ago in the State Finals. We reported the double foul but went with AP arrow instead of POI (offense with ball)

Welcome GA Official

Depending on how many few years ago this was you may have been still correct. This was a rule change for NFHS in 05-06.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Actually it doesn't. The word signal does not appear in the case play.
But following this line of reasoning, here is a question. Has anyone here ever reported a double foul when only one official made the preliminary block/charge signal and the other went up with just the fist and waited?

You think to yourself: Oh, my gosh! He called what?? Nothing to do but salvage a split.

Or in this case is it acceptable for the official who did not make the signal to provide information to the official that made one (He cleared out with his inside arm, etc.) and allow him to change his call?

Allow me to repeat myself.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The fact that the highest level of officials who operate under this rule do it this way (report the double foul) on national television should be all you need to know about the intent of this particular case play/rule. Especially since there has been more than one example of this, and no statement from the NCAA saying they'd misapplied a rule.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Allow me to repeat myself.

So you are saying that if you go up with a fist, thinking block, but your partner quickly signals PC, you report a double foul?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Actually it doesn't. The word signal does not appear in the case play.

I'm not playing semantics with you. The case play says one official called a PC and one called a block. Do you actually think they both just raised their fists, didn't signal a prelim, and still reported it as a double foul? That's stupid and you know it. In fact, you even make the point in your post. "So you are saying that if you go up with a fist, thinking block, but your partner quickly signals PC, you report a double foul? "

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Actually it doesn't.

You actually think the case play implies that both of them reported it to the table without the other knowing?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A preliminary signal is not binding in any other situation, why should it be here?

The fact that the highest level of officials who operate under this rule do it this way (report the double foul) on national television should be all you need to know about the intent of this particular case play/rule. Especially since there has been more than one example of this, and no statement from the NCAA saying they'd misapplied a rule.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The fact that the highest level of officials who operate under this rule do it this way (report the double foul) on national television should be all you need to know about the intent of this particular case play/rule. Especially since there has been more than one example of this, and no statement from the NCAA saying they'd misapplied a rule.

The officials at the highest levels also frequently allow blatant travels, as confirmed by my DVR. Apparently their interpretation of that rule is different from mine, too.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The officials at the highest levels also frequently allow blatant travels, as confirmed by my DVR. Apparently their interpretation of that rule is different from mine, too.

The NCAA has never been shy about announcing when officials have mis-applied a rule. Their silence on these plays speaks volumes.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am going to get on my soap box once again concerning the dreaded "blarge".

The NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's definitions of guarding and screening a identical (history lesson alert: these definitions go back to the NBCUSC, see Footnote #1). By defnition, it is impossible to have a "blarge". Either B1 (defensive player) has obtained (NFHS)/established (NCAA and FIBA) a legal guarding position (LGP) prior to the contact between B1 and A1 (offensive player, with the ball).

Yes, the NFHS and NCAA Men's casebook plays tell us to treat this as a double personal foul while the NCAA Women's CCA Officiating Manual that the primary official takes the call. The NFHS and NCAA Men's caseball plays cannot be defended by rule. The best way to handle this type of play is PRE-GAME, PRE-GAME, PRE-GAME.

MTD, Sr.