Blarge administration

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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.

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.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

... 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.

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.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.



.

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

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

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?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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."

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

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

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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

Peace

That long? That's a 1.5 second conversation...M&M timed it.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

That long? That's a 1.5 second conversation...M&M timed it.

With arm swings?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

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."

Well, count me as misunderstanding the womens's mechanic then. I was under the understanding that the blarge situation was to be resolved by defering to the official who had primary coverage.

While that seems to not be they was it is implemented, how is it actually written?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, count me as misunderstanding the womens's mechanic then. I was under the understanding that the blarge situation was to be resolved by defering to the official who had primary coverage.

While that seems to not be they was it is implemented, how is it actually written?

That is the way it is written...but primary coverage only has so much to do with the area on the floor. And that is where you are reading too much into it.Or maybe not reading enough...the floor coverage stuff in the NCAA-W game is much more "fluid" than in the NCAA-M game where it is more "static".

I'm having trouble thinking of a better way to put it.

[doubleringer]

I was involved in a blarge at a women's summer camp. We were complimented on the fact that we handled it correctly. I think it is a good example of how the NCAA Women's side wants it called. We were in transition. I was going to L, T didn't get in to a great position, and C had a decent look at the play. C and L had a double whistle, followed by opposing mechanics (yeah, we should have held, but that doesn't always happen). We got together right away, my C said, "you're primary", and I took my blocking foul to the table.

I wasn't happy about having a blarge in a camp situation, but I think it actually helped us out in front of the evaluators that we handled it like we are supposed to according to the women's manual.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

That is the way it is written...but primary coverage only has so much to do with the area on the floor. And that is where you are reading too much into it.Or maybe not reading enough...the floor coverage stuff in the NCAA-W game is much more "fluid" than in the NCAA-M game where it is more "static".

I'm having trouble thinking of a better way to put it.

I'm hearing two conflicting things in this thread.

Is it determined by primaries or not (regardless of how you define the primary)? Or do you discuss of the play itself and what each person saw?