Officials' Authorthy (2.6)
 

What is this rule about? and does it mean that when the calling official is adamant about his/her call, the other official/s cannot overrule?

NFHS Rule2 Officials And Their Duties ...
 

Here's how NFHS rules handle officials' authorthy:

2-3 The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules.

2-6 No official has the authority to set aside or question decisions made by the other official(s) within the limits of their respective outlined duties.

Here are some situations from the NFHS casebook:

2.6 SITUATION A: The umpire observes traveling, stepping out of bounds or another violation by A1. At approximately the same time, A1 tries for a field goal or the referee observes contact by B1 on A1. RULING: The officials must decide definitely which act occurred first. There is no rules coverage to administer the acts as occurring simultaneously. If the violation occurred first, the ball became dead. If the ball was in flight during the try before the touching of the boundary, there was no violation. If the contact occurred after a violation was observed, it is not a foul unless the contact is intentional or flagrant.

2.6 SITUATION B: A violation and personal contact occur at about the same time. Both are observed by the same official, or the violation is observed by one official and the contact by the other. What is the proper procedure? RULING: The officials shall decide which occurred first. If the violation was first, it caused the ball to become dead; hence, the contact which followed was not a foul unless intentional or flagrant. If the contact occurred first, it caused the ball to become dead and no violation occurred.

So is this what makes judgement calls (as has been discussed in a number of other threads this past week ) and the "intent" an extension of the rule book ?

Side thought : Written rules transverse games; decision/judgment calls are unique to one game,

I think I am slowly getting a better understanding of comments in previous threads.

Thank you

No. It's the specific part of the rules book titled "The Intent and Purpose of the Rules."

With very few exceptions (and those exceptions are clearly identified in the rules with language like "the referee shall...") both or all three partners are equals. My partner is specifically prohibited by rule from "overruling" any of my calls.

But there are appropriate times when one partner may help another "get it right." For example, if you know with absolute certainty that white tipped the ball before it went OOB over my line, and I indicated that it is white's ball, you should hold up play and immediately bring that information to me. If I'm about to misapply a rule, and you know what the correct ruling is, you'd should be on your way over pronto to help me out. But in any such case, it's my call and my ruling and I will make the change.

Always Listen To bob ...
 

THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE (NFHS) RULES

The restrictions which the rules place upon the players are intended to create a balance of play; to provide equal opportunity between the offense and the defense; to provide equal opportunity between the small player and tall player; to provide reasonable safety and protection; to create an atmosphere of sporting behavior and fair play; and to emphasize cleverness and skill without unduly limiting freedom of action of individual or team play on either offense or defense.

Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule.

It is the policy of the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee that there be no deviation from the rules unless experimental approval has been granted by the NFHS liaison to the rules committee.

Communication, Communication, Communication ...
 

Back In The Saddle makes some excellent points. Below you will find two parts of my pregame that I always go over with my partner, no exceptions:

On double whistles, let’s both hold our preliminary signal and not give a block or player control signal. Make eye contact with each other. Give the call to whoever has the primary coverage, most often the lead official, unless you definitely have something different that happened first, in which case we’ll talk about it.

For out-of-bounds help, let's get it right. Come together for a change if needed. If I have no idea and I look to you for help, just give a directional signal. No need to come to me. Just point. If you don't know, give me a jump ball signal. If I signal but I get it wrong then blow the whistle and come to me. Tell me what you saw and let me decide if I’m going to change it.

Comments have been helpful and noted. thanks,

Had a situation on this topic come up twice in a recent HS girls spring league tournament game I worked. I was trail both times. A1 bent over to pick up the ball and her knee hit the court while she was holding it, then she immediately jumped up. A split second later, B1 tied her up. We had a double whistle because they had just crossed into my area from my partner's (two person). A1's back was toward my partner so he couldn't see the travel first, which I saw clearly both times. He signals jump and I signal travel.

He immediately waved off his call and we went with the travel. I thought it was because it happened first, but at halftime he said it was because he felt I was the "senior official" (I'm at least 100 years older than him). I went over protocol on situations like this and explained it didn't matter who was "senior" but who was correct. He got it.

Get It Right ...
 

Well said.

The rule wording is pretty straightforward in that you cannot be overruled. That said, you don't want to be a donkey's rear end when you have one or especially two partners letting you know that you kicked a call and are trying to help you get it right.

Provide equal opportunity between the small and tall player. What does that mean? Take away the advantages a tall player has over a shorter player? For example, allow to the small player to push in the back on rebounds he wouldn't normally get because he's small? I don't get why this is in the rulebook. Does anyone have an example?

5'2" player goes to the rack, takes a bit of body & misses the layup... TWEET shoot 2

6'7" player goes to the rack, takes a bit of body, but plays through it & makes the layup... play on NOT an And 1.

Similar contact, bigger player can play through, but the smaller player cannot. Equal opportunity...
It is up to the officials to determine who can play through what & who cannot.

Don't understand the example. That's strength and has nothing to do with height. The 6'7" guy was strong enough to finish, despite contact. Basketball is not an equal-opportunity game. The taller players have an advantage. But, there's a specific rule, to try to minimize that advantage? That doesn't make any sense. And, I'd also like to hear other examples from officials that gave an advantage to a small guy for some reason.

I don't think that's the case, there's no rule to minimize the advantage of being tall.