Originally Posted by Rich1 (Post 914463)

Wow. You guys really like to split hairs. What matters here is that you had two whistles, the crew came together, and a decision was made based on their judgement in that game. This all sounds like good mechanics which gave them credibility when explaining it to the coaches. When we evaluate refs in my chapter we focus mostly on mechanics and rules unless something is agregious. Judgement is judgement and I don't want to question a fellow refs judgement unless they were clearly in the wrong. When the crew mentioned in this post came together and determined that the fouls occured at the same time, they did exactly what they should have done. Without seeing it on tape that's the only conclusion I can clme too.

Originally Posted by Rich1 (Post 914463)

Wow. You guys really like to split hairs. What matters here is that you had two whistles, the crew came together, and a decision was made based on their judgement in that game. This all sounds like good mechanics which gave them credibility when explaining it to the coaches. When we evaluate refs in my chapter we focus mostly on mechanics and rules unless something is agregious. Judgement is judgement and I don't want to question a fellow refs judgement unless they were clearly in the wrong. When the crew mentioned in this post came together and determined that the fouls occured at the same time, they did exactly what they should have done. Without seeing it on tape that's the only conclusion I can clme too.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 914527)

Had this play in an NCAA scrimmage. Final Four official observing said we need to go with the shooting foul and rule the rebounding foul as incidental contact (which is what the 2 officials decided, they just took too long to accomplish it).

So, basically what johnny d said.

Right or wrong? It's right when I'm working for certain supervisors.