E-mail to the top

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

True, good point. But this case says "simultaneous signals", rather than "conflicting signals" or "opposite signals." A fist in the air is also a signal. According to this wording, even if both officials have just a fist they should still get together.

So you take the case ruling to mean that every time 2 officials have a fist in the air they are to get together and determine the call?

In the case ruling bob cited, you're saying the officials telepathically knew they that one was calling a PC and the other a Block?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So you take the case ruling to mean that every time 2 officials have a fist in the air they are to get together and determine the call?

If necessary, they can. Usually, when two experienced officials have a fist in the air the communication consists of one walking away, thus yielding to the other.

In the case ruling bob cited, you're saying the officials telepathically knew they that one was calling a PC and the other a Block?

No, I'm saying that no matter how they knew they have the right to confer. If you don't know, and the call is uncertain, ask:

"What have you got?"

Worst case scenario is this: I'm the L. I call/rule/signal a blocking foul near the corner. The call was obvious. The defender's own coach is screaming at him. I start toward the table to report. I see my rookie partner, who was the C, peering across the lane with one fist in the air and the other hand behind his head. But now we have no choice but to report his foul as well.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If necessary, they can. Usually, when two experienced officials have a fist in the air the communication consists of one walking away, thus yielding to the other.
...

So a fist up in the air doesn't indicate what each official ruled? I agree with that.

Based on the precedence in Bob's cite, I feel validated in my belief that preliminary signals are the indicator that the officials have "ruled/called" a block and PC/charge, and therefore both fouls need to be reported.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

No, I'm saying that no matter how they knew they have the right to confer. If you don't know, and the call is uncertain, ask:

"What have you got?"

Huh?

You think that we do not know what to call and result in a double foul based on this example?

Originally Posted by just another ref

Worst case scenario is this: I'm the L. I call/rule/signal a blocking foul near the corner. The call was obvious. The defender's own coach is screaming at him. I start toward the table to report. I see my rookie partner, who was the C, peering across the lane with one fist in the air and the other hand behind his head. But now we have no choice but to report his foul as well.

What? SMDH!!!

Peace

[just another ref]

Not gonna try to explain anything else to Rut.

To summarize: Largely because of suggestions from others here, I took my cause to a higher source for a second opinion. Now many are unsatisfied with the results of this inquest. From my perspective one thing has changed. I had never seen either NCAA case before. Calling by NFHS rules, we are bound by neither, but I find the women's version infinitely more logical.

I think everybody will continue to do what they were already doing.

Until/unless something new comes to light, I think we're about done here.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Not gonna try to explain anything else to Rut.

To summarize: Largely because of suggestions from others here, I took my cause to a higher source for a second opinion. Now many are unsatisfied with the results of this inquest. From my perspective one thing has changed. I had never seen either NCAA case before. Calling by NFHS rules, we are bound by neither, but I find the women's version infinitely more logical.

I think everybody will continue to do what they were already doing.

Until/unless something new comes to light, I think we're about done here.

You do not have to explain anything to me because what you are stating is silly. You seem to be confused with the idea of what a double whistle is that all of us have and compare it to what we do on a "blarge." Oh well, it is your issue.

Peace

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by just another ref

How many have you personally been involved in?

I've been involved in two in the same season about 5 years ago. First one, we (opposing coaches) were told that since they both signaled (one a charge/one a block) both were put in the book, "by rule". Second one, they went with one call and it went against me. I argued that since both of you gave a signal, both had to be called, and I can't remember the answer, but I didn't win the argument.

One coach's opinion: I think the NCAA-W women's rule should be used.

Originally Posted by just another ref

Until/unless something new comes to light, I think we're about done here.

Absent explicit and official (wide release) clarification by the NFHS I have to agree. We keep rehashing the same arguments that involve 1) definitions, 2) wording, and 3) several confusing case plays. Any discussion with those ingredients is bound to fail.