Simeon (IL) vs DeSoto (TX) Blarge

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

On a side note...had a non-blarge in my game Friday night. As L, drive came from T's area...crash right in front of me. I hit the whistle and yell block and T is coming in yelling offense...he comes to me and asks me if I saw the offensive player shove off with his left arm...said that I had not and told him to take it to the table...he did...caught no grief from anyone.

So to ask the question again...the case play says one official "called" this, other "called" that...so at what point has something been "called"?

Every supervisor I work for says we have to eat the Blarge once 2 conflicting preliminary signals are given. I've never attended I formal clinic that tells us to do otherwise.

So for me it's very easy. Just by coincidence, tonight I will be working for the 2nd time with the only official I've ever had a Blarge with. That was about 3-4 seasons ago. Neither one of us suffered b/c of that call.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Every supervisor I work for says we have to eat the Blarge once 2 conflicting preliminary signals are given. I've never attended I formal clinic that tells us to do otherwise.

So for me it's very easy. Just by coincidence, tonight I will be working for the 2nd time with the only official I've ever had a Blarge with. That was about 3-4 seasons ago. Neither one of us suffered b/c of that call.

So it is the preliminary signal that constitutes "calling" a foul? At least as far as your supervisors go?

I am ok with that...but can also see JAR's point...

In my situation, neither of us signaled anything, we both just verbalized what we had and then realized the other guy had something different.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

In my situation, neither of us signaled anything, we both just verbalized what we had and then realized the other guy had something different.

This is a new question. Does verbalizing the conflicting calls obligate them to go with both? I don't see why that wouldn't be the same as conflicting signals.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is a new question. Does verbalizing the conflicting calls obligate them to go with both? I don't see why that wouldn't be the same as conflicting signals.

Maybe because the casebook is clear?

Why are you really having an issue with this obvious situation?

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Maybe because the casebook is clear?

Why are you really having an issue with this obvious situation?

Peace

The casebook specifically mentions neither signals nor a verbal indication, so they seem to me to be on equal footing.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The casebook specifically mentions neither signals nor a verbal indication, so they seem to me to be on equal footing.

That seems to me and others that is the problem right here.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The casebook specifically mentions neither signals nor a verbal indication, so they seem to me to be on equal footing.

What do you tell your supervisor(s)?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What do you tell your supervisor(s)?

None of this has ever come up.

[DLH17]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is a new question. Does verbalizing the conflicting calls obligate them to go with both? I don't see why that wouldn't be the same as conflicting signals.

I would hope not. Verbal communication is a useful tool to help manage games effectively.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by DLH17

I would hope not. Verbal communication is a useful tool to help manage games effectively.

I honestly think it depends on how it's verbalized. If you're informing each other, then no. If you're yelling it out as a preliminary indicator, then maybe.

That said, I can sympathize with jar's questions, except for the fact that every supervisor, trainer, and coordinator I've ever heard of interprets this the same way. Also, the contrast with the NCAA-W ruling makes it even more obvious. Attempts to argue your way out of this ruling pretty much end there, cause you know what they say about when it's you against the world.

[DLH17]

Originally Posted by Adam

I honestly think it depends on how it's verbalized. If you're informing each other, then no. If you're yelling it out as a preliminary indicator, then maybe.

Agreed.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

I honestly think it depends on how it's verbalized. If you're informing each other, then no. If you're yelling it out as a preliminary indicator, then maybe.

How do you differentiate between those two things?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

How do you differentiate between those two things?

The same way I differentiate between intelligenl discourse and garbage.

[OKREF]

I have had the same partner for about 8 years now. In our two man games if we have a double whistle, which usually happens in the lane, if a double whistle occurs the lead takes the call. I as trail know to go with closed fist and to not automatically signal a block or charge. If the lead has a whistle it is his foul. Knock in wood, we haven't had a blarge ever.