Originally Posted by tref (Post 810853)

If thats how you want to run your ballgames. In mine the knucklehead gets the foul in multiple situations.



I try to stay cognizant of all the quality players fouls.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 810857)

Who said there was a knucklehead involved?

And if I'm the primary and I have a clear foul by B2 you're saying I should then have a discussion with my parnter to see if he had the same foul? Folks I work with are going to expect me to take my foul to the table.

Originally Posted by snaqwells (Post 810866)

if i'm doing a game in the eagle's nest, i'll probably give it to #34.

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee (Post 810824)

I think it's ok that the "multiple foul" went through your head - it shows that you understand what a multiple is.

Now, that you didn't actually call a multiple foul is even better. Pick one and move on. If the fouls are about the same in severity, pick the first. If they're not the same in severity, pick the more severe one (ruling the other as incidental).

Originally Posted by tref (Post 810828)

How about incorporating total player fouls into this mix?

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 810934)

Multiple Foul:
a. One free throw for each foul:
(1) No try involved.
(2) Successful or unsuccessful two-point try or tap.
(3) Successful three-point try or tap.
b. Two free throws for each foul:
(1) Intentional or flagrant foul.
(2) Unsuccessful three-point try or tap.

4.19.11 SITUATION: B1 and B2 foul A1 at the same time while A1 is: (a) driving
down the lane; (b) in the act of shooting a successful or unsuccessful two point
try; (c) a successful three-point try; or (d) an unsuccessful three-point try.
RULING: One free throw for each foul in (a), (b) and (c) and two free throws for
each in (d). (10 Penalty 6)

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 810966)

I've gotta ask. Why does this case play have no significance with anyone, but 4.19.8 C is treated as gospel of the highest kind by everyone and explanded to include other things that are not even there?

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 810857)

And if I'm the primary and I have a clear foul by B2 you're saying I should then have a discussion with my parnter to see if he had the same foul? Folks I work with are going to expect me to take my foul to the table.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 810866)

If I'm doing a game in the Eagle's Nest, I'll probably give it to #34.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 810966)

I've gotta ask. Why does this case play have no significance with anyone, but 4.19.8 C is treated as gospel of the highest kind by everyone and expanded to include other things that are not even there?

Originally Posted by RichMSN (Post 810998)

Just cause.

Any other answer I give will result in me eventually banging my head off a brick wall.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 811007)

What does that mean? 4.19.11 is a direct extension of the rule, unlike the other which reaches a conclusion that <strike>nobody</strike>everyone but me would have come to on his own.
You yourself once said that you wouldn't come out with a double foul in a blarge situation. Did that change or were you kidding?

Originally Posted by RookieDude

As one poster said earlier...just because a signal is made, does that make it a call. If the "signal" was never reported...then does that mean it never happened, and thus was not an actual call? (you know...sort of like the tree in the forest)

Your case play states two calls are made. Therefore, I am assuming both officials could not get together and decide which call to make. Soooo, in this case...you are correct...score the basket.

I am simply saying...that in my games...we will get together and come up with ONE call, not TWo...as stated in your case play.

If I am reading this case play wrong...then I guess I will miss this inteurpt...but, at least I will be consistent with what my fellow officials do in this area.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

If I were ever to end up in a blarge situation, we certainly wouldn't come out with a double foul. I'd pretend I was working an NCAA-W game, if only for a moment.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I have never understood why this is a special situation.

If my partner signals a held ball and I have a fist up for a foul, we don't apply both. If I call a travel and my partner has a foul, we don't call both.

Like I said, 20 years without this happening and the closest I got was earlier this season, although my grandmother could've made the charge call and she died 20 years ago.

I would like to think I could sidestep the rule book and do what I posted earlier, but I'm cursed with a pretty good knowledge of the book and a history of enforcing it even when it wasn't the easy or popular thing to do.

Originally Posted by Mark T. Denucci, Sr.

Rich:

I agree with you 100%. I have argued this point for years. The rules as written prohibit blarges. Either it is a block or it is a charge, not both.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 811007)

What does that mean? 4.19.11 is a direct extension of the rule, unlike the other which reaches a conclusion that nobody would have come to on his own.
You yourself once said that you wouldn't come out with a double foul in a blarge situation. Did that change or were you kidding?