Was this handled correctly?

[BryanV21]

The difference is one is a "whale" while the other is a "minnow". I don't think everybody in the gym is going to be going crazy about a possible travel in that scenario.

We can all come up with various scenarios in which we would or wouldn't overrule our partner. In the OP I think doing so was a fine decision.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The difference is one is a "whale" while the other is a "minnow". I don't think everybody in the gym is going to be going crazy about a possible travel in that scenario.

We can all come up with various scenarios in which we would or wouldn't overrule our partner. In the OP I think doing so was a fine decision.

I believe that you are still evaluating the situation improperly.
1. Whether coaches or fans "go crazy" about a play should have no influence on the decisions of the officials or the correctness of their actions according to the books.
2. Your idea that one is a big miss and the other is inconsequential doesn't impact the properness of an official NOT blowing his whistle and then trying to enforce a penalty. The egregiousness of the situation should determine when a partner DOES blow his whistle outside of his PCA.
3. By the book, no official can ever overrule a partner on a foul or violation call.

But just to humor you:...
Let's move my scenario to directly in front of the defending team's coach and say that he is going crazy about the travel and say that his team is up by 1 with 2 seconds left in the game.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I believe that you are still evaluating the situation improperly.
1. Whether coaches or fans "go crazy" about a play should have no influence on the decisions of the officials.
2. Your idea that one is a big miss and the other is inconsequential doesn't impact the properness of an official NOT blowing his whistle and then trying to enforce a penalty. The egregiousness of the situation should determine when a partner DOES blow his whistle outside of his PCA.
3. By the book, no official can ever overrule a partner on a foul or violation call.

But just to humor you:...
Let's move my scenario to directly in front of the defending team's coach and say that he is going crazy about the travel and say that his team is up by 1 with 2 seconds left in the game.

First of all, I don't agree that allowing "crazy" fans/players/coaches to make the calls for you is okay. Nor did I say it was. I merely pointed out that this call in particular was an obvious error, as opposed to the not-so-obvious one you used in your example.

Secondly, I'm taking the context of the situation into account. While I'm not saying it's okay to blow calls in a summer league game, we're not talking about a high school playoff game here. Just like younger officials that start in the lower levels to improve and learn, doing so in a summer league game is fine by me.

Besides, while double whistles are sometimes understandable, they are generally frowned upon (at least in my area). So if an official passed on blowing his/her whistle believing their partner has the call, only to see their partner make a different call, then we don't have a situation in which the official "blew" the call. Correct me if I'm wrong (I by no means have the rule book memorized), but I don't believe a foul call MUST come after a whistle.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Correct me if I'm wrong (I by no means have the rule book memorized), but I don't believe a foul call MUST come after a whistle.

In total disbelief.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

In total disbelief.

Well then, smartguy, why don't you point out in the rule book where it states that a whistle must occur for a foul to be called? You used the argument that an official can't call a foul without having blown his whistle beforehand, so how about you back it up?

Or would you rather just throw out jabs that do nothing to further the discussion or provide an answer?

[Raymond]

I've had a coupletimes when I forgot to put the whistle in my mouth and yelled out foul.

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Well then, smartguy, why don't you point out in the rule book where it states that a whistle must occur for a foul to be called? You used the argument that an official can't call a foul without having blown his whistle beforehand, so how about you back it up?

The rule book doesn't say that. The mechanics manual does. 2.4.2B-1, page 34 (if you work 2 man), or 3.4.2B-1, page 70 (if you work 3 man).

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by AremRed

The rule book doesn't say that. The mechanics manual does. 2.4.2B-1, page 34 (if you work 2 man), or 3.4.2B-1, page 70 (if you work 3 man).

That lays out the correct procedure in order to call a foul, but it does not say that a whistle must be blown before a foul is called. There are many instances where an official does not do things by the book, but that doesn't mean their call is incorrect or nullified.

Therefore, it is wrong to say an official can not call a foul if he did not blow his whistle beforehand. Which was part of the argument against doing what the official in the OP did.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I believe that you are still evaluating the situation improperly.
1. Whether coaches or fans "go crazy" about a play should have no influence on the decisions of the officials or the correctness of their actions according to the books.
2. Your idea that one is a big miss and the other is inconsequential doesn't impact the properness of an official NOT blowing his whistle and then trying to enforce a penalty. The egregiousness of the situation should determine when a partner DOES blow his whistle outside of his PCA.
3. By the book, no official can ever overrule a partner on a foul or violation call.

But just to humor you:...
Let's move my scenario to directly in front of the defending team's coach and say that he is going crazy about the travel and say that his team is up by 1 with 2 seconds left in the game.

(Picking nits) Unless we let them go in the wrong direction the whole game, this couldn't happen . . .

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

(Picking nits) Unless we let them go in the wrong direction the whole game, this couldn't happen . . .

Pretend that it's an NBA game.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Pretend that it's an NBA game.

Thanks, Nevada. (Hopefully, you took my comment as a friendly note. I only mentioned it to try to lighten the conversation a bit. You're one of the members of this board who's insight and comments are always appreciated.)

[Raymond]

Get a room.

[Rob1968]

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Thanks, Nevada. You're one of the members of this board who's insight and comments are always appreciated.

He's also the Archive King.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The difference is one is a "whale" while the other is a "minnow". I don't think everybody in the gym is going to be going crazy about a possible travel in that scenario.

We can all come up with various scenarios in which we would or wouldn't overrule our partner. In the OP I think doing so was a fine decision.

With the sole exception of not considering it "overruling" my partner, I agree. I'm also not too keen of worrying about everyone going crazy, but that's a semantics difference, I think.

I'd be less inclined to do this with a partner with any significant experience, though.