Double Foul (video)

[Maineac]

Originally Posted by bainsey

If so, it would have been less confusing for everyone had the official gotten those fists out quickly. Then, all would have known sooner the fouls were "offsetting."

It looks to me like she had the DF signal up right after her initial signal, right around :10 on the video. Not sure how much sooner she could have gotten it out there.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Maineac

It looks to me like she had the DF signal up right after her initial signal, right around :10 on the video. Not sure how much sooner she could have gotten it out there.

Good catch. She did it so quickly, I didn't even notice, as my eyes were still on the play. You know the slow, methodical signals we're required to do in these parts.

[BryanV21]

It's like when I was an umpire and we'd roll our eyes whenever the phrase "tie goes to the runner" was said (usually by a fan/parent). It's never a tie. See what came first and make the appropriate call.

I'm not saying you can't have a double foul, but chances are one came before the other. I think a lot of refs use the double foul call as a cop-out, because they weren't paying close enough attention.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I think a lot of refs use the double foul call as a cop-out, because they weren't paying close enough attention.

Agree, because I've done it myself. I know, in my mind, that something must have happened, that I missed, to lead up to the "double trouble". Just because I missed the first illegal contact, doesn't mean that I'm going to let the players continue to whack each other, so I end up, reluctantly, calling the double foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

...
I'm not saying you can't have a double foul, but chances are one came before the other. I think a lot of refs use the double foul call as a cop-out, because they weren't paying close enough attention.

Cop-out implies a lack of intestinal fortitude. I look at it more as not seeing the whole play. I'd rather have a partner call a double foul, instead of letting the 2 players continue to pound on each other.

[HokiePaul]

I generally don't have a big problem with calling double fouls for rough post play where both players are instigating equally. Although here, I don't think it is a double foul.

Either white holds initially (can't tell from the video angle, but the calling official should have been able to see this). If white isn't holding early, then I don't see anything illegal after that and the foul would be on the offensive for pushing off with her forearm. Two separate plays in my opinion, and not close enough to warrent a double foul.

[ballgame99]

When in doubt, call the foul on the girl with the headgear. Guessing you don't wear headgear in women's basketball unless you are a banger.

I see this as being initiated by black, then a reaction by white, both of which are fouls. Get the first one, although that is easier said than done sometimes.

[Pantherdreams]

1 - If we are cleaning up rough play I don't care who gets it so long as its got.

2- If we don't see who starts it then I'm ok with whoever gets it getting double foul.

3- I would prefer that someone get the first action and call that before we get to that point.

That being said we can't contrl overreactions/ unexpected reactions to things we were willing to pass on.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Cop-out implies a lack of intestinal fortitude. I look at it more as not seeing the whole play. I'd rather have a partner call a double foul, instead of letting the 2 players continue to pound on each other.

I also think officials use this as a cop-out still. They do not want to piss off one team so they call a double foul when one contact clearly took place first. That being said, this has been acceptable for a long time. I used to buy into this even when the contact was not at the same time, which basically is the requirement for a double foul to be called. I just think this is not a good situation where you can default on a double foul. The player in black clearly was pushing off the white player and then the white player reacted. Get the first foul.

Heck I remember going to John Adam's camp back in the day and he said, "If you miss the first foul, miss the second foul, call the third foul" when he would talk about post play. But that was also a long time ago and before he was the NCAA Director and there was more emphasis on freedom of movement.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I also think officials use this as a cop-out still. They do not want to piss off one team so they call a double foul when one contact clearly took place first. That being said, this has been acceptable for a long time. I used to buy into this even when the contact was not at the same time, which basically is the requirement for a double foul to be called. I just think this is not a good situation where you can default on a double foul. The player in black clearly was pushing off the white player and then the white player reacted. Get the first foul.

Heck I remember going to John Adam's camp back in the day and he said, "If you miss the first foul, miss the second foul, call the third foul" when he would talk about post play. But that was also a long time ago and before he was the NCAA Director and there was more emphasis on freedom of movement.

Peace

At least someone who calls a double foul is paying attention to off-ball coverage and is probably coachable into being more diligent about getting the first illegal contact in the future.

I've worked with officials who have no idea what is going on off-ball.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

At least someone who calls a double foul is paying attention to off-ball coverage and is probably coachable into being more diligent about getting the first illegal contact in the future.

I've worked with officials who have no idea what is going on off-ball.

That is true. You are not a ball watcher in most cases if you call a double foul. Or you watched the action late. Not disagreeing with you there, I just like the first foul to be called. I pride myself on getting the first call even when there is a reaction. Sometimes the reaction helps me make the call that action that happened first.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... even when the contact was not at the same time, which basically is the requirement for a double foul to be called.

Same time? Not quite. The rule reads, "approximately the same time".

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Cop-out implies a lack of intestinal fortitude. I look at it more as not seeing the whole play. I'd rather have a partner call a double foul, instead of letting the 2 players continue to pound on each other.

Sure... if you don't get the first foul, at least call something so things don't progress into something more serious. But use that situation as a learning experience.

Originally Posted by bainsey

Iit would have been less confusing for everyone had the official gotten those fists out quickly. Then, all would have known sooner the fouls were "offsetting."

Originally Posted by bainsey

She did it so quickly, I didn't even notice, as my eyes were still on the play.

Are you going to change your tune and say she did the signal too quickly now??

[JetMetFan]

I'm with bainsey on this. When I first saw this play I had the sound down on my CPU. The T put her arms out and back down so fast I had no idea it was a DF. I only figured it out when I saw the ball being put in play via a throw-in.