22 years, 1 blarge

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by refiator

True......BUT, you have to pregame this scenario so that officials freeze, make eye contact, and then ONE makes the signal....Typically, it is best for the lead to make this call in 2 person, or if the ball comes from the trail's area in 3 person.

I'm past all the pre-game stuff. We are now talking about the actually case play.

Dual coverage, both officials give a preliminary. If this is not what the rulesmaker intended to be addressed by the case play, then what?

[refiator]

I disagree. Dual coverage or not, someone needs to be "primary". Sure, a pregame may not keep this from happening, but a blarge is always preventable.
Having to call a double foul in these cases looks ugly, and makes the appearance that the crew is not on the same page.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by refiator

I disagree. Dual coverage or not, someone needs to be "primary". Sure, a pregame may not keep this from happening, but a blarge is always preventable.
Having to call a double foul in these cases looks ugly, and makes the appearance that the crew is not on the same page.

Still haven't answered my question. If my scenario is not what the rules makers had in mine, then what?

[refiator]

I hear you, BadNews.....This is a tough situation no one wants to be in and there is not a "good fix"........

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rwest

If the majority is wrong for inferring that the preliminary signal is "calling a foul" then you are equally wrong for conferring to determine which foul occurred first. It's not supported by rule or mechanic.

How do the two guys who both just went up with a fist arrive at just one call?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by refiator

I hear you, BadNews.....This is a tough situation no one wants to be in and there is not a "good fix"........

Been there once. In a college game. With a far more experienced official than I.

Following season, I still got an increased college schedule. Other official added the D-League to his resume'.

So it's not the end of the world. But I bet we WOULD HAVE gotten in trouble if we had decided to ignore the case play.

[refiator]

Originally Posted by just another ref

How do the two guys who both just went up with a fist arrive at just one call?

That is my point with the pregame, overrated or not.
I will pregame that the lead takes this call. The trail drops, lets the lead take it, and then you can discuss your differences off of the court. This can be discussed all week with differing opinions, but at least in this case the crew does not look disjointed.

[Camron Rust]

JAR, if you were even close to right, the case play in question wouldn't need to exist at all.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

JAR, if you were even close to right, the case play in question wouldn't need to exist at all.

If it does need to exist, it needs to be reworded. As is, any way you look at it, either the case itself or its perception has holes in it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Same sh!t, different day.

Saturday.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Same sh!t, different day.

Saturday.

They have calendars in hell.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by refiator

I disagree. Dual coverage or not, someone needs to be "primary". Sure, a pregame may not keep this from happening, but a blarge is always preventable.
Having to call a double foul in these cases looks ugly, and makes the appearance that the crew is not on the same page.

Very, very good officials have had blarges (I don't put myself in the very, very good category). For better or worse. If it was *always* preventable, it wouldn't happen at higher levels and I do remember seeing D-1 guys have them from time to time.

(Like I tell my football crew -- we haven't had an inadvertent whistle in a varsity game in 5 years -- but if we do, there's a half-page in the rule book to deal with it. There's a specific procedure. IWs should NEVER happen, but they do and when they do, we move on and handle the situation by rule. We can apologize and we can admit that this shouldn't happen, but it did and we're moving on from it. Period.)

For whatever reason, officials tend to give a quick preliminary on block/charge calls. I think part of it is that if 2 officials go up with a fist and look at each other and wait too long, there would be a perception of nobody knowing what's going on. Right or wrong, there is that.

Sometimes, though, a call is obvious and obviously in a primary and another official simply makes a mistake. And I feel in NFHS and NCAAM that there simply isn't a choice here. I think the intent of the case play is clear and ties my hands.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by just another ref

What assumption is that? We all realize this is what happened. I think we all realize that the two opposing views should not result in opposing signals.

But if they do, decide which call is best and go with it.

You don't if you go by the book. There is no support for getting together and deciding which is best.