The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 17, 2009, 03:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Then you're reading this case play differently than virtually every high school and college assigner and rules interpreter I've ever heard, read, or seen. If that was their intent, they'd have written the case play like the NCAAW, telling the officials to get together and make a decision.

This is the only case where the prelims become binding, and the reasoning is simple even if it is "suspect."
Snaq, if that is true, then I have to be wrong. I dont believe I am. I think my reading makes more sense. But I dont have your experience on this. I certainly cant say I have any idea how "virtually every high school and college assigner and rules interpreter" interprets this. If you and CR and others say I'm wrong, what choice do I have but to concede. I've stated the way I read it and why, if I'm wrong I'm wrong. I cant challenge your guys' experience with how it is called across the country.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 17, 2009, 03:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 151
I wonder what Nevada would say on this
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2009, 12:50am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdaref View Post
I wonder what Nevada would say on this
NFHS Rules:
Once two officials give conflicting foul signals on such a play, then the crew MUST go with a double personal foul and resume at the POI per Case Book 4.19.8 Situation C.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2009, 01:07am
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
NFHS Rules:
Once two officials give conflicting foul signals on such a play, then the crew MUST go with a double personal foul and resume at the POI per Case Book 4.19.8 Situation C.
But, as we all know from our reading, this is paraphrased. The word signal does not appear in the above mentioned case. Neither does the word must.

I have a new question on this subject. Double whistle. Neither official gives a preliminary signal, but they have opposite opinions of the play. Each is positive that he is correct. Is it ok to go with a blarge if this happens?
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2009, 10:00am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
But, as we all know from our reading, this is paraphrased. The word signal does not appear in the above mentioned case. Neither does the word must.

I have a new question on this subject. Double whistle. Neither official gives a preliminary signal, but they have opposite opinions of the play. Each is positive that he is correct. Is it ok to go with a blarge if this happens?
Blocks and charges (player control) get preliminary signals at the spot of the foul according to the NFHS manual, I believe (don't have it with me). So I'm thinking this case play was written with that in mind.

I just don't understand the resistance to following what the NHFS wants in this specific situation. NCAA-M have the rule/case written the same as NFHS. NCAA-W has written the rule specifically to go with the call of the primary official. Why can't we just accept that we should call it the way the respective governing bodies want to us to call it?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR

Last edited by Raymond; Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 11:03am.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2009, 10:26am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
But, as we all know from our reading, this is paraphrased. The word signal does not appear in the above mentioned case. Neither does the word must.
I'm still curious as to which reasoning you think the committee had when writing this case play.
1. Was it written for the beligerent a$$es who won't concede to one another.
2. Was it written for the odd case where both officials report their respective fouls without knowing about the other?
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2009, 10:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
I'm still curious as to which reasoning you think the committee had when writing this case play.
1. Was it written for the beligerent a$$es who won't concede to one another.
2. Was it written for the odd case where both officials report their respective fouls without knowing about the other?
I mentioned my theory - the committee wants to make correcting an official's screw-up onerous enough that officials will be less likely to do it again.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 18, 2009, 10:37am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by M&M Guy View Post
I mentioned my theory - the committee wants to make correcting an official's screw-up onerous enough that officials will be less likely to do it again.
On this particular play, I think it's because B/C calls are tense enough anyway; giving prelims for both sides is just asking for trouble when you retract one. Just think about the time you gave the wrong prelim and went with the other call; now imagine the blarge situation and the reaction from the coach who gets the short end of this call.

I think your theory has merit, too, and may have factored into it.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2009, 02:10am
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
I'm still curious as to which reasoning you think the committee had when writing this case play.
I posted it somewhere at least once before. The first time this case was brought to my attention, I thought the whole point was to emphasize that the shot could count since the foul by the offense was not a player control foul due to the fact that it was a part of a double foul. But, I went on to wonder, if this was their intent, why would they not make the case something which could actually happen:

B1 reaches across and whacks A1 on the arm while A1 simultaneously pushes off with the other arm.

I am assured by most that this was not the intent. So, what was it? To call attention to the fact that one official got a call wrong, and subsequently make that wrong call stand rather than give the officials a chance to decide which call was right? Furthermore, the idea that the whole deal hinges on the preliminary signals would never have occurred to me.

So, while we're on the subject........

I have asked this before, but I don't recall ever getting an answer.

Play in your primary. Contact. You have an obvious blocking foul call. You go up with a fist, but hearing your partner's whistle, hold the prelim signal.
Partner comes in, emphatically making his PC signal.

What do you do?
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2009, 08:37am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
...
Play in your primary. Contact. You have an obvious blocking foul call. You go up with a fist, but hearing your partner's whistle, hold the prelim signal.
Partner comes in, emphatically making his PC signal.

What do you do?
Let him have the call and then have a very lengthy post-game.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2009, 08:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
I have asked this before, but I don't recall ever getting an answer.

Play in your primary. Contact. You have an obvious blocking foul call. You go up with a fist, but hearing your partner's whistle, hold the prelim signal.
Partner comes in, emphatically making his PC signal.

What do you do?
Play in your primary. Defender flops. No contact at all. Partner blows whistle and comes in, emphatically making his PC signal. What do you do?

Same answer to both plays.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2009, 10:21am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
Play in your primary. Contact. You have an obvious blocking foul call. You go up with a fist, but hearing your partner's whistle, hold the prelim signal.
Partner comes in, emphatically making his PC signal.

What do you do?
Same thing my partner did to me in the one of my first varsity games: let him have the call and discuss later.

I knew immediately that we'd talk about it later. He was a great partner (I've moved since) and teacher.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 17, 2009, 04:13pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdaref View Post
Snaq, if that is true, then I have to be wrong. I dont believe I am. I think my reading makes more sense. But I dont have your experience on this. I certainly cant say I have any idea how "virtually every high school and college assigner and rules interpreter" interprets this. If you and CR and others say I'm wrong, what choice do I have but to concede. I've stated the way I read it and why, if I'm wrong I'm wrong. I cant challenge your guys' experience with how it is called across the country.
Opposing block/charge prelims is a specific exception in the rule book, just like there are specific exceptions for backcourt violations on throws-in.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 17, 2009, 04:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 151
I'm going to see what my commish has to say on this one. I have a funny feeling he will say: "get together, it cant be both so make one call not some cheesy double foul, and then figure out which one of you two knuckleheads should have held his preliminary signal and dont do that again." But then again, he's a common sense guy
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 17, 2009, 04:30pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdaref View Post
I'm going to see what my commish has to say on this one. I have a funny feeling he will say: "get together, it cant be both so make one call not some cheesy double foul, and then figure out which one of you two knuckleheads should have held his preliminary signal and dont do that again." But then again, he's a common sense guy
Rec League commish: "pick one foul and go with it"

HS or college supervisor: "report the blarge and never let it happen again"
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Blarge tjones1 Basketball 4 Thu Dec 28, 2006 01:46am
Blarge -- or was it? rainmaker Basketball 3 Sun Mar 26, 2006 09:04am
Blarge All_Heart Basketball 14 Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:39pm
Another Blarge Snake~eyes Basketball 6 Fri Jan 13, 2006 03:16pm
Blarge or not? ChuckElias Basketball 9 Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:57am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:55am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1