And cue JAR in 5...4...3...2...1...

Been busy today- not ignoring everyone.

Flipping the index cards in my head reveals that watching a game before mine over the summer had a blarge and one of the refs hanging around commented that the blarge should go like this- Tweet- double whistle, different fouls- come together and discuss, if neither backs off the call, you have a blarge which is administered as a foul for each and only 1 foul shot (if shot was missed).

I know that this was wrong, but I haven't been in the book for awhile, so I didn't exactly recall what the proper adminsitration was. Of course, now I've been back in the book and found the correct administration.

Perhaps it is also a difference in NCAAW and NCAAM, but then again, it's never always 100% clear during AAU ball which rules we are using. If I recall correctly, it was a girls tourney, using some NCAAW rules.

Z

Even tagging the wrong player with the foul?

Nice parrot line....None of what you said addresses the play as I presented it.

Pregame has NOTHING to do with how you ultimately resolve this situation.

If the player is coming along the line separating the two areas (and the player received the ball in that location), just who's area is it in and who's area is it actually coming from?

The point is that the NCAA-W rule has holes in it...there are situations that it still doesn't resolve.

The officials STILL have to agree about exactly where the foul occurred to determine who's primary it was in....and some plays will be in both.

Camron - what "holes" are you talking about in the NCAA-W mechanic? How do you handle ANY double-whistle situation? How about a double whistle where one official has a foul, and the other official signals a travel? And the play happened in a dual-coverage area? How does a crew handle that in NCAA-M or NFHS, vs. the NCAA-W rule and mechanic on a blarge?

Pre-gaming these plays is the BEST way to determine how they will be resolved on the court. And the blarge is no different than any other double-whistle situation where two officials have different calls.

To me, the double foul call on a blarge is simply a cop-out call, and there is absolutley no rule basis behind it. However, I understand the reason for the call is because officials still do not always use the proper mechanics, so when they don't in this case, both teams get penalized. It's not fair to one of the teams, but perhaps that's the penalty for an official screwing up. No different than correctable error situations or timing errors - we can argue all day whether the rule book solutions are "fair" to one team or another, but perhaps the rule committees decided they would make these solutions purposely "not fair" in order to make sure officials don't screw up so often.

The double foul penalty on the blarge is in the rule in NFHS and NCAA-M, so that is how it needs to be enforced. If a crew is mechanically sound, it will never happen, just like a correctable error will never happen to a crew that follows all the prescribed mechaincs. But, if a blarge does happen, the NCAA-W rule is still the best way, overall rule-wise, to handle it, just like any other double-whistle situation.

I wasn't gonna, but since you asked.

My question is always that even if the officials did simply raise a hand, isn't that still "calling a foul"?

True, the whole world doesn't know what each official's call was at this point, but I see nothing written anywhere which says that a preliminary signal makes any call any more binding and irreversible.

4.19.8 Situation C (last year's casebook) says so.

"One officials calls a blocking foul on B1 and the other official calls a charging foul on A1."

I would think that would be hard to do without a preliminary signal. ;)

Peace

And you feel that way because you work that level. I am OK with that, but that does not mean the rest of us or anyone that does not work that level has to agree that is the best way. Because as Cameron said, that philosophy has holes in it. I admit that a blarge is not ideal for anyone, but at least you are not arbitrarily choosing who gets the call. Because one of the blarges I have had in my career was in transition in the middle of the court. There was no "primary" at least listed. At least we followed a hard fast rule. The NCAAW side seems like we might decide based on the ego of the individuals rather than just a hard fast rule. And just like a correctable error there is no wiggle room how to solve the problem. The NCAAW side created a lot of wiggle room if you ask me.

Peace

Why? You go up with a fist. Your partner does likewise. You know you what your call was going to be and so does he. It is not that unusual for you and your partner to have different calls on the same play. But it's okay to only report one of them unless you gave conflicting preliminary signals.

Where is this written?

nowhere

I kinda like having wiggle room when solving problems.

But, hey, I farm for a living. My whole life is wiggle room.

:D

We do a lot of things that are not written. If everything was spelled out explicitly all the time, you would not have room to change.

And it is writing the interpretation. If that is not good enough for you that is fine, but it is written. Maybe not the way you would like it to be, but you cannot have two different calls unless you tell them. Unless the NF or NCAA expects you to read minds we have to determine somehow there were two different calls. I think we are a long way from getting a reliable machine to tell what officials are actually thinking without a signal.

Peace

If indeed this is the intent of the writer(s), a simple editorial change would cover it.

If 2 officials give conflicting preliminary signals on a block/charge play, both fouls must be reported.

4-19-8 and, naturally 4.19.8, deal with double fouls. The word signal does not appear in either. In theory, any call may be made after giving any signal, proper or otherwise, or no signal at all. No signal, conflicting signals, both examples of bad mechanics. But name another call that is changed by an official's failure to use proper mechanics.

Until now I have never heard a single person ever question the intent of this and a reason you will not likely see such a change. ;)

Peace

Camron,

Wrong player? You are going to tag both players with a foul...that is the alternative!

Nothing is perfect...but IMO it is better than a blarge and a double foul.