Agree.
And you would be happier yielding to your partner who called a charge when you KNOW that the defender slid in after the shooter was airborne but your partner couldn't see that from his/her angle?

Who said I would do that?

You did...

If you're working NCAA-W, you don't have a choice if it is in your partner's primary...even if you had a better view of the play and had the correct call.

You made the claim that the two officials get together and make the "correct cal". But in reality, the only decision being made is where the play occured relative to primaries. That determines the call...but it doesn't make it the correct call.

I say communicate with your partner and use one call. I agree with Jeff when he says that communication in this situation often does not require words, especially between veteran officials who have worked together.

The part that is patently ridiculous to me is to reference this one case play and describe it as specific.

"One official calls...........the other official calls..........."

When is call a call? The word call is not defined. I say a foul has not been called until it is reported to the table.

Most seem to think that when conflicting preliminary signals are given, you are stuck with both calls.

WHY???

Nothing that resembles that is written anywhere.

This even opens up the question, when is a signal a signal? Did the one official's hand actually touch the back of his head?
The other guy never actually touched his hips, but he was obviously poised to do so. How much is too much. This, like many other things which happen on the court cannot be absolutely covered by the written word.
I have been guilty in the past of anticipating one thing, starting the wrong signal, then changing to the (perceived) correct one. A mistake? Certainly.
Forbidden by rule? Certainly not.

My partner and I have a double whistle. He correctly sees a charging foul. I am fooled and make the block signal, then realize before I am finished blowing the whistle that he is right. You think I'm gonna report my foul? Not in this lifetime.

And what happens if your partner has signalled that charging foul and you are in the the process of blowing the whistle for a block, which YOU are 100% sure is the correct call and your partner is wrong? Are you NOT going to report your correct foul call? Are you gonna try to over-rule your partner or try to talk him out of his call? Arm wrestle your partner to see which call is gonna be reported?

Do what you want to do, JAR. To everybody else, just follow the applicable rule.

We will talk, briefly, privately. If we are both unwaveringly certain, conceivably
we would report both fouls. But, I would think, 99% of the time, we would go with one call or the other, after considering location of the play, angles involved, and possible obstructions of the view.

Camron, you are 100% wrong. (Well, ok, I didn't make up that statistic.) :)

You are basing your opinion on one of two things - either a lack of understanding of the NCAA-W's mechanic, or a lack of trust in how two officials are taught to handle any double-whistle situation.

Let me ask you how you would handle this play: you are T, I am L. You have a drive start in your primary, going to the basket. There is enough contact at the basket to warrant a foul call, and both of us blow the whistle and hold up a fist. What do you do now?

Geeze guys, just go with a quick rock, paper, scissors and be done with it! You guys could argue with a possum or an opossum, whichever it is. Why don't we argue that one!? ;)

Well, we both know the right answer it to hold the signals and figure out who is going to take the call....by eye contact, discussing it, or whatever and deciding which one is the right call.

But, the discussion is not about that. The discussion is about what to do when both have already signaled with opposite calls. Now that both have done so, the NCAA-W mechanics, if I do understand them correctly, indicate that the call that will be reported/recorded will be the one of the primary official....no discussion/choice.

And that's the part I figured you had incorrect. We would come together just like any other two officials would when they have conflicting signals (block/charge, foul/violation, foul on different players, etc.) on a double-whistle.

Now, what is the NFHS procedure on a double-whistle with conflicting signals, but not a blarge? I'm sure most would say give it up to the primary, because that call is more likely to be correct. But if the secondary has additional information, they would convey that in communicating with the primary official. But it's not 100% the primary's call, "no discussion". In other words, the mechanic for the blarge in NCAA-W is the same as all other levels for other double-whistle situations with or without conflicting signals.

Does the NCAA-W mechanic manual not say that the primary takes the call in the event of a blarge? If so, what is there to discuss aside from where it occurred on the court. If you do anything different, you're not following the mechanic.

Again, a blarge is completly different than all of the other examples you mention. You keep comparing how two different events are handled vs. two opinions of one event. Your argument that they should be handled alike has no merit.

WHERE it occurred on the court is only part of whose primary call it is, and you know that.

Agreed, but isn't the mechanic and discussion solely about who's primary it is, not who actually had the right call?

No...I don't think I have ever been in a double-whistle situation where the discussion was only "Hey, it happened inside the imaginary box on the floor that delineates my primary, not yours."

The discussions have always been along the lines of: "What have you got?" "I've got #42 sliding in under the shooter after she was airborne." "Oh, ok. You take it then."

In my experience the conversation does not take that long in most cases. Or does not need that much explanation.

Peace