Blarge

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The "loaded" question you speak of, for those who may not know, was this.

The subject line of the e-mail was Case book 4.19.8c. The question was: Some associates and I have discussed this case which involves two officials making conflicting calls on a block charge play at great length and still have disagreement about when both fouls must be reported and when one may defer to the other.

Her answer: If there are double whistles, the two officials should get together and discuss what was seen and which may have come first. In fact when there are two whistles the officials should immediately hold the signal for the infraction and have the discussion. If one defers to the other then the signal is given and the official moves to the table to report. If they cannot come to an agreement, then they rule a double foul and both players will report (it does not matter who reports first). Ruling a double foul on a block/charge would not be the thing to do.

Her answer says *nothing* about when one signals a block and one signals a PC -- it is clearly talking about 2 officials posting.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

Her answer says *nothing* about when one signals a block and one signals a PC

Neither does the case play, but this was the follow up question:

The main point of contention is what happens when the two officials, unfortunately, mistakenly give opposite preliminary signals and whether this changes the equation

Her answer: It does not change the equation. They still should come together and talk to make a final decision. If the decision is to go one way over another then that person goes to the table to report. If no one wants to give in, then they go to the table to report both fouls.

Ultimately, you should talk with your state office to determine if this is the direction they want the officials to go.

[Rich]

I can't believe I got sucked in again.

Sorry to everyone else.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Neither does the case play, but this was the follow up question:

The main point of contention is what happens when the two officials, unfortunately, mistakenly give opposite preliminary signals and whether this changes the equation

Her answer: It does not change the equation. They still should come together and talk to make a final decision. If the decision is to go one way over another then that person goes to the table to report. If no one wants to give in, then they go to the table to report both fouls.

Ultimately, you should talk with your state office to determine if this is the direction they want the officials to go.

Yeah, b/c she knows her answer doesn't hold water; she's giving the NCAA-Women's interpretation to an NFHS rules question. Since when does the NFHS tell officials to let their individual states to interpret a rule? Does her response really pass the smell test?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The "loaded" question you speak of, for those who may not know, was this.

The subject line of the e-mail was Case book 4.19.8c. The question was: Some associates and I have discussed this case which involves two officials making conflicting calls on a block charge play at great length and still have disagreement about when both fouls must be reported and when one may defer to the other.

Her answer: If there are double whistles, the two officials should get together and discuss what was seen and which may have come first. In fact when there are two whistles the officials should immediately hold the signal for the infraction and have the discussion. If one defers to the other then the signal is given and the official moves to the table to report. If they cannot come to an agreement, then they rule a double foul and both players will report (it does not matter who reports first). Ruling a double foul on a block/charge would not be the thing to do.

You are drawing a conclusion from that answer that just isn't there. In fact, her response actually counters your point. Her response indicated that there were two whistles ONLY, no signals. That is the key. That implies that once signals are given, the decisions have been made and it is too late to have the discussion.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Ultimately, you should talk with your state office to determine if this is the direction they want the officials to go.

You are right about one thing, but my state goes by what the NF has put in their casebook. Never been given any other position but to go with a double foul. Do what you want in your area and let you suffer the consequences from there.

Peace

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Rich

I can't believe I got sucked in again.

Sorry to everyone else.

*chuckle*

[Rob1968]

Do we understand that if the blarge/double foul is the decision, and the shot counts, that the awarding of 1 free throw, is nullified?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Do we understand that if the blarge/double foul is the decision, and the shot counts, that the awarding of 1 free throw, is nullified?

What's their to understand, and why add confusion. The resumption of play is the POI, doesn't matter the foul count. If the ball goes in team gets to inbound and run the endline. If it doesn't we go to the AP for a spot throw in.