blarge- POI or AP

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

He was a great partner and teacher.

Snaqwells: Thanks for the compliment, but I don't remember the play.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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?

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Let him have the call and then have a very lengthy post-game.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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

Okay, I have said from the start that the words call and signal were not interchangeable. Many have said for the purposes of this case they are intended to be. A fist in the air is still a signal. You signaled (called?)
a foul, but it's okay to yield to your partner here just because he gave a prelim, which you believe to be wrong, and you gave none?

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Okay, I have said from the start that the words call and signal were not interchangeable. Many have said for the purposes of this case they are intended to be. A fist in the air is still a signal. You signaled (called?)
a foul, but it's okay to yield to your partner here just because he gave a prelim, which you believe to be wrong, and you gave none?

It's not only okay, it's advisable.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Okay, I have said from the start that the words call and signal were not interchangeable. Many have said for the purposes of this case they are intended to be. A fist in the air is still a signal. You signaled (called?)
a foul, but it's okay to yield to your partner here just because he gave a prelim, which you believe to be wrong, and you gave none?

And we are saying that in this very specific play (opposing prelims given by two officials) is the only time where the prelims are binding; and only because of the case play.

1. I have not spoken with an assigner, rules interpreter, or even just a veteran official who reads this differently.

2. It doesn't make sense to think they wrote a case play to enable two beligerent referees who refused to yield. If they wanted it done the way the college women do it, they'd have worded the case play the same way.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

1. I have not spoken with an assigner, rules interpreter, or even just a veteran official who reads this differently.

Maybe one?

2. It doesn't make sense to think they wrote a case play to enable two beligerent referees who refused to yield.

Maybe not, but it also doesn't make sense to think that they wrote a play which makes one of these refs stick with a wrong call even if he realizes it after the fact.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Maybe not, but it also doesn't make sense to think that they wrote a play which makes one of these refs stick with a wrong call even if he realizes it after the fact.

Again, here's my theory, fwiw: Having two officials call/signal/premliniary signal is a bad mechanic, especially in the case of the block/charge call. My feeling is the rules committee wants to make the solution to a bad mechanic situation as un-palatable as possible, while still being kinda fair, so it gives the officials an incentive to do it right the first time. If the proper mechanics are followed, such as no quick preliminary signals, and yield to the official whose primary the call is in, the need for this rule will never come into play.

You are arguing with the wrong people on this. In fact, you have now also earned my "Tilting at Windmills" Award (which I usually reserve for Snaqs):


I agree the "best" method is the NCAA-W method, which is the 2 officials come together and figure out whose primary the call should come from, and go with one call. But we do not get that option in NFHS, no matter how hard you try to fit it in to your logic. It is straight forward, in black-and-white, and in the case of the blarge only. If you want to lobby the rules committee to change it, I'll be one of the first to sign your petition. In the meantime, rulz is rulz.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

If you want to lobby the rules committee to change it, I'll be one of the first to sign your petition.

Kinda thought that's what I was doing. There is evidence that the committee has visited this board, is there not?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Kinda thought that's what I was doing. There is evidence that the committee has visited this board, is there not?

Ohhhh...that's what you're doing. I thought you were just trying to be annoying.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

You are arguing with the wrong people on this. In fact, you have now also earned my "Tilting at Windmills" Award (which I usually reserve for Snaqs):

Hey, I behaved myself when the topic just came up.