Gonzaga / Southern video (Added)

[icallfouls]

Please cite your rules reference.

It is not a double until both officials signal the nature of the call. Once both officials have signaled completely different calls, then they must have the double. Yes, everyone in the gym knew what he was likely to call.

However, I will say that I remember a game where I came up with two hands and actually correctly called a PC. So it is possible, though remote, he was about to signal charge.

The crew narrowly averted the BLarge because the L did not signal.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Please cite your rules reference.

You know where it is.

Once the official has signaled a call, he's made that call. Given that no official may overrule another, when another official makes a different call, to change it is considered to be an overrule. They're stuck with both calls. The rules resolution of that is a double foul.

Sure, his signal wasn't" complete" but it was sufficient to know what it was. Once that is done where he has made his call known, in the case of a conflicting double whistle, there is no going back...by rule. That is the only reason that rule exists....to avoid the appearance of one overruling another.

And some will try to slice it by saying it should belong to the primary but I can always create a play where the primary is also ambiguous....so that still doesn't resolve it....and it is just as likely to lead to the wrong call as it would lead to the right call.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You know where it is.

Once the official has signaled a call, he's made that call. Given that no official may overrule another, when another official makes a different call, to change it is considered to be an overrule. They're stuck with both calls. The rules resolution of that is a double foul.

Sure, his signal wasn't" complete" but it was sufficient to know what it was. Once that is done where he has made his call known, in the case of a conflicting double whistle, there is no going back...by rule. That is the only reason that rule exists....to avoid the appearance of one overruling another.

And some will try to slice it by saying it should belong to the primary but I can always create a play where the primary is also ambiguous....so that still doesn't resolve it....and it is just as likely to lead to the wrong call as it would lead to the right call.

Just playing to the other side of the argument.

Citation please. It is a double whistle. The T communicated to the L to hold his preliminary, then took the call himself.

He did not signal anything other than two hands in the air, which could have been a held ball for that matter.

[LeeBallanfant]

It would have been interesting to see what would have happened had Ted Valentine instead of being center had been lead and was waved off by the trail.

[just another ref]

Could someone post the NCAA rule regarding a blarge?

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Could someone post the NCAA rule regarding a blarge?

It was a memo/directive. If both officials give a preliminary signal, then both calls are taken to the bench and enforced. It is a common discussion the pre-games I have been part of to make sure that both officials are slow to show, rather than banging both right away.

The other thing from the video. Both officials go with two hands up, but only one gives a preliminary. The T basically gives the L a "no-no, I got this!" two handed stop sign. They made eye contact and the L gave the call to the T or the T took it, whatever you prefer.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

It was a memo/directive. If both officials give a preliminary signal, then both calls are taken to the bench and enforced.

Okay, thanks. So, like NFHS, there is nothing in the books to this effect. But, unlike NCAA, NFHS has no such memo/directive. Interesting.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

It was a memo/directive. If both officials give a preliminary signal, then both calls are taken to the bench and enforced. It is a common discussion the pre-games I have been part of to make sure that both officials are slow to show, rather than banging both right away.

The other thing from the video. Both officials go with two hands up, but only one gives a preliminary. The T basically gives the L a "no-no, I got this!" two handed stop sign. They made eye contact and the L gave the call to the T or the T took it, whatever you prefer.

I hope you're joking that only one gave a prelim. Sure, the lead didn't "finish" it, but he gave enough of it for everyone to know what he had. If the signal is received, that means it was sent. He showed what he had.

And, you know there is no way he was going from that position to a charge....you do that same thing and I've never seen you go to a charge from there.

One officials two hands up were actually in the process of making a block signal. The other other officials hands were not yet showing anything. At that point, the call was a block by one and nothing by the other. The trail then still came in, told him he was wrong, then made a contradictory signal....overruling him improperly. Was the ultimate call right? Sure. But the trail trampled all over his partner on that one.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

He did not signal anything other than two hands in the air, which could have been a held ball for that matter.

You know better than to believe that. It is, at best, dishonest to say the lead hadn't called a block.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You know better than to believe that. It is, at best, dishonest to say the lead hadn't called a block.

Well he did not actually signal anything. It might have been obvious what he was going to signal by his body language, but for all of our purposes, he never signaled. He was stopped from signaling by his partner.

Peace

[Nikki]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well he did not actually signal anything. It might have been obvious what he was going to signal by his body language, but for all of our purposes, he never signaled. He was stopped from signaling by his partner.

+100

There was no preliminary signal made by either official. No matter what anyone thinks about the L going up with both hands - he had not yet made the signal for a block, no matter what he was GOING TO do.

[icallfouls]

I'll bet when the L looks at the video, he'll be pretty happy that he didn't give a preliminary, and his partner called him off.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well he did not actually signal anything. It might have been obvious what he was going to signal by his body language, but for all of our purposes, he never signaled. He was stopped from signaling by his partner.

Peace

Originally Posted by Nikki

+100

There was no preliminary signal made by either official. No matter what anyone thinks about the L going up with both hands - he had not yet made the signal for a block, no matter what he was GOING TO do.

He gave a motion that indicated what he was calling. Not showing is putting up a single fist indicating only foul and giving NO visual cues to which way you're going. That official skipped that and went straight to the block signal. What he did was the first part of a block and everyone knows it.

Anyone that thinks that official was doing anything other than calling a block and that his motions were anything other than part of the block signal is delusional. You're letting your desire to not have a blarge cloud what is obvious.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Isn't a block signal include putting your hands on your hips at some point? I do not see any block signal in any book that shows your hands raised. Not sure it is that complicated as you seem to be making it, where you agree with Camron or not.

Peace

So they have to get all the way to the hips? If he stops 1" from his hips and does it 3-4 times, it isn't a block? Yeah, right. :/