Someone in another thread mentioned the possibility of calling a double foul in a block/charge situation. Specifically, a guard shoving off just as the defense forces contact while not in position. Is this an effective call to make?

Adam

It's a very effective call for reducing your schedule ;)

It's very very extremely rare for one official to call a double foul in a block/charge scenario. What happens more often is that one official will call a block and another official will call a charge at the same time. When that happens, by rule, both fouls are assessed; resulting in a double foul.

Chuck

Chuck,
It was me in the other thread, but now that this is the topic for the thread what do you try to do. In the true block/charge double whistle, do you talk in a pregame about who would/should/could "release" the call to the other official or do you do the double foul thing??? In my other post and still here and now, I cannot agree that it is a double foul. Either the defender was there and a charge or he wasn't and it is a block?? I don't see how it can be a double foul(even though I do know what it says in the book). Obviously the best situation is to not have the situation arise, but we all know it does. I know in our pregames, we talk about releasing the call to the official that the play is coming to?? Any thoughts any one???

I believe the most important thing to be discussed in the pregame is that on a double whistle the trail and center should not have preliminary signals. If the lead is going with the charge then they will sell it and the trail and center can agree by just holding the fist. If the trail's whistle is first then the lead's...eye contact, eye contact, eye contact. The official whose primary it is will sell it from there.

Ok, we're now talking about two different scenarios, right? Scenario one is the ballhandler pushing off at about the same time as the defender bumps him. Scenario two is the classic "blarge" where two officials see the same play and make different calls. Let me comment on both, one at a time.

Scenario one: I think in this case, you have to judge which occured first and ignore the second one. OR if one was so severe that it can't be ignored, then you call that one and ignore the other. I personally would not come out with a double foul in this situation.

Scenario two: Chris is right. The best way to handle this is not to let it happen. Pre-game with your partner who has responsibility on a drive to the basket. Is it the Lead? (It's coming right at him.) Is it the Trail? (He's watching the whole play develop.) Is it the Center? (It originated on his side of the floor.)

Once you decide who has the responsibility for the drive, the officials MUST be disciplined enough to withhold their secondary signal (either block or charge) if the call is not their primary responsibility. Just go up with the fist and see if your partner also has it. If your partner doesn't have it, then make your call.

Now, if it happens that you both signal and you give different signals, then you must assess both fouls and go to the arrow. You don't really have a choice. It's very clear in the casebook how to handle it.

Best choice is not to let it happen, as Chris said.

Chuck

I agree whole heartedly with not letting it happen via discussion and discipline. To me though it is more palatable to have the double foul with the first scenario for this reason. I work almost exclusively two whistle game so I will comment with that in mind. Play comes at the lead, lead sees B1 move late into the path of A1, trail clearly and correctly sees A1 lead with the forearm. Both have the whistle (not good but it happens :) ) they get together and both have a foul, and to me it is possible that both players fouled. While in scenario two the problem is a difference in judgement between the officials, it just seems to me that it can't be both again I know what the case book says and I do agree if you end up that deep into the situation you should abide by it. I just wish the federation would change the case book interpretation. Now that not withstanding, take the case book away for a minute. Do you agree that it in reality is impossible to have a "blarge", that it is either one or the other, but from different officials may get different judgements? If you agree with that do you also agree that the federation should change the case book interpretation??

I agree that a play cannot be both a block and a player control foul. One or the other happened. Either the defender was legal or he wasn't. One of the officials got it wrong.

Having said that, I don't think we want to change the interpretation. I don't want to see officials on the floor get into a, uh, shouting match as to who had the best angle. This interpretation gives a clear cut solution to a very bad situation. I'd stick with it unless something equally clear cut could replace it, like "the Trail's call always stands". Otherwise, you open it up to differing results each time it happens. Just my opinion.

Chuck

good point Chuck, and upon further review : ) I would have to agree, just stress super communication....

Play comes at the lead, lead sees B1 move late into the path of A1, trail clearly and correctly sees A1 lead with the forearm. Both have the whistle (not good but it happens :) ) they get together and both have a foul, and to me it is possible that both players fouled.

When does the foul occur? It should be based on contact. If contact occurred from the dribbler's forearm then that is the foul that happened first. The block was secondary. The only scenario that may change this is an airborne shooter. I would think then the contact that occurred would be initiated by the defense and would have to be a block. The situation of opposite calls is easier to correct in a 3 whistle game. The areas and primary responsibilities are reduced greatly.

In thoery, perhpas. But I see block/charge double fouls all the time, in person as well as on TV and they're always by three man crews, since we don't work 3 man and all TV games are 3 man.

The bigger problem is failure to raise the fist and make eye contact prior to signalling. :(