Another Blarge

[eyezen]

I've been personally way to close that. First year working a varsity at small rural school north of me. I'm trail and a girl takes off on a dribble from the opposite baseline headed towards the near side via underneath the basket. Girl steps in and bam. Lead signals a foul with the fist - and should of just stopped there. Next thing I know he's got one hand on his hip and the other behind his head. I think he ended up going block. It just happened to be her fifth which only added to the fun. Being green I stayed as far away as I could.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by jalons

I heard a story of a substate game (winner advances to the state tournament) last week where one official blarged himself! From the account I was given (I was not at the game), the defender stepped in front of the ball handler and may or may not have taken contact. The defender fell to the ground and the calling official blew his whistle, signaled a player control foul with one hand and a blocking foul with the other.

I had a partner who had a one-man blarge in a college game this year. He's Lead on a drive to the basket. Crash right in front of him. His whistle (no one else blew) and he signals charge. Hand behind the head, pointing the other way. Then before he leaves the spot, he bangs his fists on his hips. He reported only the block.

I was Trail, and it was clearly a PC. Oh well.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I had a partner who had a one-man blarge in a college game this year. He's Lead on a drive to the basket. Crash right in front of him. His whistle (no one else blew) and he signals charge. Hand behind the head, pointing the other way. Then before he leaves the spot, he bangs his fists on his hips. He reported only the block.

I was Trail, and it was clearly a PC. Oh well.

This illustrates my position on the issue. This guy apparently anticipated one thing, then apparently saw something else, but his hands were slow to get the message.

According to the logic of the blarge case: "Dammit, I screwed up the signals, I gotta report a double foul."

[APG]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This illustrates my position on the issue. This guy apparently anticipated one thing, then apparently saw something else, but his hands were slow to get the message.

According to the logic of the blarge case: "Dammit, I screwed up the signals, I gotta report a double foul."

And the one man crusade is at it again....

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by just another ref

According to the logic of the blarge case: "Dammit, I screwed up the signals, I gotta report a double foul."

Wrong. The blarge case clearly refers to two distinct officials making different calls on the same play.

Whatever prospects your crusade has, you won't help them with this kind of reasoning.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Wrong. The blarge case clearly refers to two distinct officials making different calls on the same play.

Whatever prospects your crusade has, you won't help them with this kind of reasoning.

The point was what happens if one official found himself in the position of the above example. He anticipated a PC foul, but the defender got into position more quickly than expected. The contact occurs, the official makes the PC signal, then immediately realizes his mistake. He changes to the block signal.
But now he can't do that because meanwhile his partner made the correct call. (signal)

So everyone thinks this was the intent of the case play?

And everyone thinks this is ok?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

And the one man crusade is at it again....

Well this is obviously the bad part about this board. I never hear these kinds of discussions in any other officiating discussion. I have never heard anyone but JAR make this claim that a call means anything but a signal. I guess it takes all kinds.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I had a partner who had a one-man blarge in a college game this year. He's Lead on a drive to the basket. Crash right in front of him. His whistle (no one else blew) and he signals charge. Hand behind the head, pointing the other way. Then before he leaves the spot, he bangs his fists on his hips. He reported only the block.

I was Trail, and it was clearly a PC. Oh well.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have never heard anyone but JAR make this claim that a call means anything but a signal.

Consider the above example. One signal was made. A mistake was realized. The call was changed, accompanied by a different signal. It happens, usually without a second thought.

The two terms are not interchangeable.

[APG]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well this is obviously the bad part about this board. I never hear these kinds of discussions in any other officiating discussion. I have never heard anyone but JAR make this claim that a call means anything but a signal. I guess it takes all kinds.

Peace

It's not that discussing the rules like we do sometimes on this board is bad. Sometimes it's good to discuss the "finer" aspects of the rules to get a really good grasp of the rules...especially at this time in the year when most people are wrapping up their seasons.

But we've gone down this road so many times. On this board, it is literally JAR vs. the world. This crusade is even sillier than an insistence of using a belt or not. I even agree with him that by very definition, a blarge is impossible. But NFHS has given us clear direction on how to handle this. It has a universal application of when it comes into effect. One official calls a charge, one calls a block, we have a blarge. This is the same in NCAA-M and the NBA.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Consider the above example. One signal was made. A mistake was realized. The call was changed, accompanied by a different signal. It happens, usually without a second thought.

The two terms are not interchangeable.

Well I do not know how you can call something without giving a signal of some kind. But for some reason you found a way to be more confused by it. How is that working out for you?

Peace

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This illustrates my position on the issue. This guy apparently anticipated one thing, then apparently saw something else, but his hands were slow to get the message.

According to the logic of the blarge case: "Dammit, I screwed up the signals, I gotta report a double foul."

I disagree. I have before signaled the wrong direction for the OB play. I corrected myself and pointed the right way. Do I then use the APA for the throw-in? No, I don't.

This is one guy who changed his mind because he knew something pertinent after his initial signal.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I disagree. I have before signaled the wrong direction for the OB play. I corrected myself and pointed the right way. Do I then use the APA for the throw-in? No, I don't.

This is one guy who changed his mind because he knew something pertinent after his initial signal.

Exactly! And that's exactly what he should do. And this is perfectly acceptable to everyone, except in this one ridiculous example.

[Jurassic Referee]

Jarlandia---population-1

Lah me........

[tomegun]

If we let plays start, develop and finish - a current term, but used for years in some form - we will become better play callers. This may or may not help with a true blarge (two officials), but it can certainly help with a one man "blarge"/confusing signals/two contradicting signals on the same play.

[Mechanicsman]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I disagree. I have before signaled the wrong direction for the OB play. I corrected myself and pointed the right way. Do I then use the APA for the throw-in? No, I don't.

This is one guy who changed his mind because he knew something pertinent after his initial signal.

Yes! How many times do you see officials say "white" and point in blacks direction. The official know which one is correct and he doesn't have to use both and go AP.