"blarge call" high school

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The NCAA position is not relevant to me, and I've never actually read the NCAA rule/case that relates to this.

The NCAA-Men's position is identical to the NFHS position, so basically, you have read it.

Originally Posted by just another ref

...I did ask the question to a guy at camp once:
"If this happens, do we have to report both fouls?" He seemed shocked by the question. "NO! Why would you?" I assured him that I wouldn't, but apparently a lot of guys would. He said, "NCAA, yes, NFHS no."

A "guy" in a camp? Did he assign games? Was he with the state governing body?

What happens when/if you work state play-off games with 2 guys/gals from other parts of the state and they say "if....2 preliminaries....we have report it as a blarge"? You tell them, "no, that's not what we are doing" ?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

A "guy" in a camp? Did he assign games? Was he with the state governing body?

I don't recall who the guy was. I'm not even sure if he was a camp official or just a camper. The point is, that was the only other place I had asked the question, and the guy agreed with me.

What happens when/if you work state play-off games with 2 guys/gals from other parts of the state and they say "if....2 preliminaries....we have report it as a blarge"? You tell them, "no, that's not what we are doing" ?

As far as I know, all members of a crew in the playoffs here come from the same place. If it ever does happen, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. My opinion in that situation would be as valuable as one of theirs.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I don't recall who the guy was. I'm not even sure if he was a camp official or just a camper. The point is, that was the only other place I had asked the question, and the guy agreed with me.

Don't you think that is kind of important who the guy is? Because if he is not a person that is on any committee or has influence over what your state or organizations are doing, how is anyone else going to follow his logic on the subject?

I am a clinician in my state, which means I can talk about rulings or interpretations my state puts out in trainings or camps. I would never talk about just what I think when there is an interpretation out there for everyone to see.

Originally Posted by just another ref

As far as I know, all members of a crew in the playoffs here come from the same place. If it ever does happen, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. My opinion in that situation would be as valuable as one of theirs.

Not if you are not following the rule and your own logic of the remedy.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Don't you think that is kind of important who the guy is? Because if he is not a person that is on any committee or has influence over what your state or organizations are doing, how is anyone else going to follow his logic on the subject?

I had a conversation with a guy. Who the guy is doesn't matter. He had an opinion, just like you and I. I'm just saying that this was one guy who had the same opinion I have.

Not if you are not following the rule and your own logic of the remedy.

Peace

I read the case and came to a conclusion about it. Other officials should do the same. Until somebody who has authority over what I do on the court tells me different, I will continue to practice and preach the same philosophy.

As far as discussing it here, while it is redundant, no I'm not trying to annoy anyone. (that's just an added perk ) But we do have new members being added to the discussion all the time, so restating one's opinion is the thing to do, even if one is alone in that opinion.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I had a conversation with a guy. Who the guy is doesn't matter. He had an opinion, just like you and I. I'm just saying that this was one guy who had the same opinion I have.



I read the case and came to a conclusion about it. Other officials should do the same. Until somebody who has authority over what I do on the court tells me different, I will continue to practice and preach the same philosophy.

As far as discussing it here, while it is redundant, no I'm not trying to annoy anyone. (that's just an added perk ) But we do have new members being added to the discussion all the time, so restating one's opinion is the thing to do, even if one is alone in that opinion.

I just wonder why you prefer to debate us as opposed to getting a definitive ruling from the body that governs HS basketball in your state, or from the national body. Especially considering that you say you are the interpretor for your organization. In VA, interpreters are responsible for getting official rulings from the state/NFHS when there are questions or disputes.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I just wonder why you prefer to debate us as opposed to getting a definitive ruling from the body that governs HS basketball in your state, or from the national body. Especially considering that you say you are the interpretor for your organization. In VA, interpreters are responsible for getting official rulings from the state/NFHS when there are questions or disputes.

And I stated I am a clinician in my state. And we are expected to follow or seek information from the state administrator or others in authority when there is a need for a ruling. Everyone's email and phone number is listed if I need an interpretation.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I had a conversation with a guy. Who the guy is doesn't matter. He had an opinion, just like you and I. I'm just saying that this was one guy who had the same opinion I have..

It does matter if you want to use it as your justification of how you apply the rule or interpretation. This is why I do not go around say, "Well there is the guy online that says we should do....." and then following that interpretation. That is why we have state interpreters or administrators that we answer to. And if we already have a rule or interpretation in place and in writing, I am not going to take some guy I heard at a camp tell me what to do.

Originally Posted by just another ref

I read the case and came to a conclusion about it. Other officials should do the same. Until somebody who has authority over what I do on the court tells me different, I will continue to practice and preach the same philosophy.

I do not have to work with you specifically. But if someone told me they were going to do what you suggest, I am not going out without a big fight. And if we do something that is not followed by rule, I am making it known you were the one that took that position when I am asked later about why we did not follow the rule, if I even allow you to use some rule that is not supported by any interpretation.

Originally Posted by just another ref

As far as discussing it here, while it is redundant, no I'm not trying to annoy anyone. (that's just an added perk ) But we do have new members being added to the discussion all the time, so restating one's opinion is the thing to do, even if one is alone in that opinion.

I really do not think you are annoying anyone. Just find it funny you keep taking this position when there is wording that does not support your position. It is great you have an opinion, but most of us do not work based on your opinion here. As stated, keep up the good fight.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I had a conversation with a guy. Who the guy is doesn't matter. He had an opinion, just like you and I. I'm just saying that this was one guy who had the same opinion I have.

Considering who you are (or say you are) and what position you have (or say you have), you have a very strange way of validating your opinion, and a strange place to go to do so.

"This one time, at basketball camp..." doesn't fly. Not here, not on the court, and CERTAINLY not if you're issuing opinions to others that they are expected to follow.

[just another ref]

When I say I am an interpreter, perhaps I flatter myself. The title is unofficial and self-proclaimed and I have no authority over anyone, and don't want any. But I am the main one who answers rules questions, at meetings and on the phone. As far as having a question or dispute on this rule, I don't have one anywhere except here. It's never been a problem on the court and I don't expect one. If there has ever been an official ruling on this issue, in my state or any other, I assumed I would have seen it posted here at one time or another. I have not.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by just another ref

When I say I am an interpreter, perhaps I flatter myself. The title is unofficial and self-proclaimed and I have no authority over anyone, and don't want any. But I am the main one who answers rules questions, at meetings and on the phone. As far as having a question or dispute on this rule, I don't have one anywhere except here. It's never been a problem on the court and I don't expect one. If there has ever been an official ruling on this issue, in my state or any other, I assumed I would have seen it posted here at one time or another. I have not.

So ... you have NO ONE you could ask this of whose opinion you would consider as definitive? You have had no clinics at which this would come up?

Because I assure you, sir - the opinion you're expressing (all alone, I might add) here is contrary to those heard from clinicians and interpretors the rest of the country over.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

When I say I am an interpreter, perhaps I flatter myself. The title is unofficial and self-proclaimed and I have no authority over anyone, and don't want any. But I am the main one who answers rules questions, at meetings and on the phone. As far as having a question or dispute on this rule, I don't have one anywhere except here. It's never been a problem on the court and I don't expect one. If there has ever been an official ruling on this issue, in my state or any other, I assumed I would have seen it posted here at one time or another. I have not.

You have, ad infinitum, and you're the only one who thinks the case play says anything different.