Final piece of the puzzle

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The literature is clear, I am not having issues with what is written.

If the literature was truly clear then we would not be having this discussion.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

If the literature was truly clear then we would not be having this discussion.

It's clear to me and anybody with whom I've ever officiated. I'm confident that streak will continue.

[MechanicGuy]

The literature may be clear, but allowing for (or even requiring) two opposite fouls/calls for the same contact is patently absurd.

Disagreements, even opposing signals, happen often during a game, but this is really the only situation where the officials are unable to come together and decide the proper call.

If a ball is tipped out of bounds on the sideline in transition and the L points one way while the T points the other, does that automatically make it a jump ball or should the two come together and see who had the best look/is most confident in their call?

I suppose the most important lesson to learn from all of this is to hold your preliminary signal, especially is the contact occurs out of your PCA....or closer to another officials' PCA.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

The literature may be clear, but allowing for (or even requiring) two opposite fouls/calls for the same contact is patently absurd.

yep

Disagreements, even opposing signals, happen often during a game, but this is really the only situation where the officials are unable to come together and decide the proper call.

The NFHS rules editor says the officials not only can but should come together and decide.

[OKREF]

So, if two conflicting signals means that you must report both, then what happens when one signals a travel and one signals a foul? Are we reporting the foul?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by OKREF

So, if two conflicting signals means that you must report both, then what happens when one signals a travel and one signals a foul? Are we reporting the foul?

That's a separate case play. It says the officials must decide which happened first.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That's a separate case play. It says the officials must decide which happened first.

I understand that.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

The literature may be clear, but allowing for (or even requiring) two opposite fouls/calls for the same contact is patently absurd.

The fundamental principle is that neither official is permitted to overrule another official. Same contact, two judgement, apply both rulings. That is really the only fair result. Any discussion had is going to one official's opinion overriding the other no matter how you phrase the resolution.

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

Disagreements, even opposing signals, happen often during a game, but this is really the only situation where the officials are unable to come together and decide the proper call.

If a ball is tipped out of bounds on the sideline in transition and the L points one way while the T points the other, does that automatically make it a jump ball or should the two come together and see who had the best look/is most confident in their call?

Apples and oranges.....that is a matter of who saw what and when, not two opinions of who was at fault for a single contact.

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

I suppose the most important lesson to learn from all of this is to hold your preliminary signal, especially is the contact occurs out of your PCA....or closer to another officials' PCA.

As I've said many times before, that is good on paper, but has holes in it in practice. There are several locations that are on the boundary of both officials primaries and the players may be moving directly along that boundary. Now what?

Originally Posted by OKREF

So, if two conflicting signals means that you must report both, then what happens when one signals a travel and one signals a foul? Are we reporting the foul?

Two events, one happened first. Figure out which. Neither official is wrong, just that the first action caused the ball to become dead making the 2nd action moot by rule.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AremRed

If the literature was truly clear then we would not be having this discussion.

If it was truly unclear, this discussion would be had in multiple places. It has never been had by many but in this place, initiated by one person. That should tell you something.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

...initiated by one person. That should tell you something.

I didn't initiate the argument. I refused to go along with a widely held idea which makes no sense. And now I have support for my position from people who matter. Find somebody who matters to publicly support your position and then we can discuss it further.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I didn't initiate the argument. I refused to go along with a widely held idea which makes no sense. And now I have support for my position from people who matter. Find somebody who matters to publicly support your position and then we can discuss it further.

Again, no one in my entire career has even questioned this situation on any level. So it must make sense to a lot of people. NO ONE!!!! I repeat NO ONE but you made this argument. Even those that disagreed with the interpretation never suggested what you did. NO ONE!!!!

And I do not need validation because if anything the people that matter have wondered why officials did not own up to their signal and give a double foul. NO ONE but you has ever tried to apply this any other way. And since you are not anyone in my immediate world, I am not going by what you say or what your email states. I cannot go with "some guy on the official's site thinks we should do something contrary than the casebook." I do not know about you, but I like working.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And I do not need validation because if anything the people that matter have wondered why officials did not own up to their signal and give a double foul.

And what people would that be? I have quotes from my people. Let's see some from your people.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

And what people would that be? I have quotes from my people. Let's see some from your people.

The Administrator of basketball in my state. The Head Clinician and Rules Interpreter of our state. If they come out and say different, then I will do what they request. Until that time, it is just noise in the background.

Oh, I am not asking for quotes from anyone. No one around here is questioning the casebook that is already written. And once again, you do not live in our state and we are not having this debate ANYWHERE!!!!

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I didn't initiate the argument. I refused to go along with a widely held idea which makes no sense. And now I have support for my position from people who matter. Find somebody who matters to publicly support your position and then we can discuss it further.

"People who matter" to you. Let's be clear.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

"People who matter" to you. Let's be clear.

The editor of the NFHS books doesn't matter to you?