The Official Forum
Page 4 of 6 « First 23 4 56
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   22 years, 1 blarge (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/56918-22-years-1-blarge.html)

Raymond Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 658666)
I can only imagine it applying in your #2, and no, I can't imagine that they wrote a case play specifically for that purpose. But it is equally difficult for me to imagine that a case play was written to specify that one team should be penalized if the officials improperly use preliminary foul signals, and that this is true even though the case play in question does not actually mention preliminary foul signals.
Manual not readily available, but aren't PC and Blocks supposed to get a preliminary on the spot of the foul? And wouldn't that indicate a specific foul has been called? And how are you assuming "improper" use of preliminaries if the play were to happen in a dual coverage area, but the officials just had differing opinions?

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 658753)
Same sh!t, different day.

Friday.
They brought it up, yesterday and today.

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 658756)
Manual not readily available, but aren't PC and Blocks supposed to get a preliminary on the spot of the foul? And wouldn't that indicate a specific foul has been called? And how are you assuming "improper" use of preliminaries if the play were to happen in a dual coverage area, but the officials just had differing opinions?
I don't know what is in the manual, but is it not generally agreed that on a double whistle officials should withhold the preliminary signal for this very reason?

Jurassic Referee Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 658757)
They brought it up, yesterday and today.
And don't think that I'm not pissed off at them for not just ignoring something as idiotic as your assertation that a plainly written rule simply doesn't exist. :)

Nobody that can read and has an IQ higher than a doorknob would ever buy that nonsense anyway. So...why bother arguing it with you?

But keep on keeping on, JAR. Maybe you can lure somebody else in.

WOBW.

Raymond Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 658760)
I don't know what is in the manual, but is it not generally agreed that on a double whistle officials should withhold the preliminary signal for this very reason?
Yes, but once the preliminaries are used, the fouls have been "called".

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 658774)
Yes, but once the preliminaries are used, the fouls have been "called".
Is that in the manual?

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 658770)

WOBW.
Am I the only one who doesn't know what this means?

Is it one of them "philosophy from hell" things?

Jurassic Referee Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 658786)
1) Am I the only one who doesn't know what this means?

2) Is it one of them "philosophy from hell" things?
1) Waste of band width.

2) No, it's an accurate description of this particular discussion.

Raymond Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 658774)
Yes, but once the preliminaries are used, the fouls have been "called".
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 658785)
Is that in the manual?
I'll go along with you and say it is not. So, now back to my question, when would the case play apply?

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 658790)
1) Waste of band width.

2) No, it's an accurate description of this particular discussion.
So you continue to use more band width to point out what a waste of band width the discussion is.:confused:

chartrusepengui Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 658793)
So you continue to use more band width to point out what a waste of band width the discussion is.:confused:
and of course you've proven his point again by responding

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by chartrusepengui (Post 658796)
and of course you've proven his point again by responding
Thought that's what band width was for.


I actually don't really know what band width is.

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 658791)
I'll go along with you and say it is not. So, now back to my question, when would the case play apply?
In my world, it wouldn't. I cannot envision a situation where it would.

mbyron Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 658747)
By definition, if a blocking foul happened, a charge didn't happen, and vice versa.
Which definition is that?

BLOCK: "Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of an opponent with or without the ball."

CHARGE: "Charging is illegal personal contact caused by pushing or moving into an opponent’s torso."

Nothing in these definitions precludes the possibility of having both on one play.

You might have a point about proper enforcement, but that's not a matter of definitions.

just another ref Fri Feb 05, 2010 01:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 658810)

BLOCK: "Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of an opponent with or without the ball."

CHARGE: "Charging is illegal personal contact caused by pushing or moving into an opponent’s torso."
These two things can happen simultaneously?:confused:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:17pm.
Page 4 of 6 « First 23 4 56
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1