"blarge call" high school

[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.

I think a few posters are taking JAR's "I asked a guy at camp" defense too literally.

The point is that JAR asked a guy what his common sense told him. His argument is an appeal to common sense. Common sense tells use a block/charge play is either a block or a charge (in varying degrees). If there is a close play the mechanics manual doesn't tell us to rule a double foul to cover all our bases, it tells us to make the call as best we can (by deferring, PCA, etc.). It does make common sense to gather and decide on one or the other, and that's the argument JAR was appealing to.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I think a few posters are taking JAR's "I asked a guy at camp" defense too literally.

The point is that JAR asked a guy what his common sense told him. His argument is an appeal to common sense. Common sense tells use a block/charge play is either a block or a charge (in varying degrees). If there is a close play the mechanics manual doesn't tell us to rule a double foul to cover all our bases, it tells us to make the call as best we can (by deferring, PCA, etc.). It does make common sense to gather and decide on one or the other, and that's the argument JAR was appealing to.

"Common sense" doesn't sign any of my checks. Each one of my college supervisors and both of my HS assignors expect their officials to adjudicate "blarges" by reporting 2 fouls to the table. Sitting here debating us ad naseum is not going to get JAR the answer he is looking for. Who cares what a bunch of anonymous Internet officials say when you have the option of getting a definitive ruling from your governing bodies?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I think a few posters are taking JAR's "I asked a guy at camp" defense too literally.

The point is that JAR asked a guy what his common sense told him. His argument is an appeal to common sense. Common sense tells use a block/charge play is either a block or a charge (in varying degrees). If there is a close play the mechanics manual doesn't tell us to rule a double foul to cover all our bases, it tells us to make the call as best we can (by deferring, PCA, etc.). It does make common sense to gather and decide on one or the other, and that's the argument JAR was appealing to.

None of us could use that standard and expect to be taken seriously. Even at a camp you have to know who is talking to you. Not everyone is in a position to require you to do much of anything. And not only do we already have a ruling, it is in writing in the casebook of both bodies in which I work.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Even at a camp you have to know who is talking to you.

I talked to a guy at camp. It meant nothing. I talk to guys here every day, which also means nothing. It was a counter to the NOBODY agrees with you statement which I hear so frequently, nothing more.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

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.

I don't doubt that, but consider a couple of things. The meat of the discussion here is always all about opinions and interpretations because the case play alone doesn't even come close to saying what is for some reason considered holy. There is nothing about signals. There is nothing which says one official cannot change his ruling. The only thing definitive in this case is what you do when this fiasco is called. Count the basket, point of interruption, etc.

Then, turn to the next page in the book. There is a case play about multiple fouls. It has no gray areas at all. B1 and B2 both foul A1. Your report both fouls and shoot x number of free throws. period Yet everybody here, including me, says pick one and report it. This case play is not important at all, because?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

...This case play is not important at all, because?

Because that is now those who write our checks expect us to call the game.

And are we supposed to believe that you officiate in a state where there has never been a "blarge" reported to the table? B/c that what all you posts are saying since you say you'll never have to worry about it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Because that is now those who write our checks expect us to call the game.

That is what this is all about. Only thing my assignor ever told me not to call was a T for plane violations on a throw-in, referring to it as a "two bit call." And this was in response to a complaint from a coach after a loss. This was a direct instruction from a superior, but it had no basis in the rules. I'm saying that must be what we're dealing with here, I simply don't understand why/how any interpretation was twisted in this direction.

And are we supposed to believe that you officiate in a state where there has never been a "blarge" reported to the table?

There may have been a dozen this week, but I personally have never seen or heard of one.

[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.