Lesson learned

[Adam]

Camron, he did say he was considering the X as he closed down for his own call. That tells me it was at least borderline. I'm not saying T would have been the right call, the decision to go intentional would have to stand on its own aside from dead ball status. From there, you decide whether to ignore or T.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Camron, he did say he was considering the X as he closed down for his own call. That tells me it was at least borderline. I'm not saying T would have been the right call, the decision to go intentional would have to stand on its own aside from dead ball status. From there, you decide whether to ignore or T.

I don't see that in the OP at all.....it appears to me that he only thought of that AFTER his partner called the foul on the other player.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't see that in the OP at all.....it appears to me that he only thought of that AFTER his partner called the foul on the other player.

Post 5, in response to bob.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Post 5, in response to bob.

Fair enough...it was not in the OP.....but if I'm thinking X and my partner says I've got it, I'm going to be talking about it anyway.....regardless of what I think my partner has.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Fair enough...it was not in the OP.....but if I'm thinking X and my partner says I've got it, I'm going to be talking about it anyway.....regardless of what I think my partner has.

Fair enough, but I could see that going badly if not done right. "partner, you think that might be an intentional?"
Partner, "Sure."
Partner then inexplicably calls an intentional for the OTB foul.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by tref

Well if he has an "over the back" foul & it wasnt on a try, the clock stops there, right?
Then the egregious act had to be on the dead ball, no? To me that sounds like a false double. In that situation the 2nd foul was during a dead ball... Intentional T or flagrant T.

The play isn't dead until the whistle is blown. According to you, you all blew the whistle at the same time, AFTER B34 backed A34 out. Therefore, B34's action did not come after the whistle, so it is NOT a dead ball foul.

BTW, there's no such thing as an "over the back" foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

There's no such thing as an "over the back" foul.

Over the back is not a foul. There must be illegal contact to have a foul. A taller player may often be able to get a rebound over a shorter player, even if the shorter player has good rebounding position. If the shorter player is displaced, then a pushing foul must be called. A rebounding player, with an inside position, while boxing out, is not allowed to push back or displace an opponent, which is a pushing foul.

In other words: Over the back isn't a foul, on the back is a foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

The play isn't dead until the whistle is blown. According to you, you all blew the whistle at the same time, AFTER B34 backed A34 out. Therefore, B34's action did not come after the whistle, so it is NOT a dead ball foul.

BTW, there's no such thing as an "over the back" foul.

The ball is not dead on the whistle. In the case of a foul, it's dead when the foul occurs. If tref's partner deemed A34's actions to be a foul, then B34's backout occurred during a dead ball (assuming no try was in progress) regardless of when the whistles blew.