[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I think that many of you are missing the point. There is only one correct way to do things per the rules and casebook plays. There are interpretations and casebook plays that I do not think are correct, but has a rules interpreter, it is my responsibility to give the correct interpretation and to make sure that officials and coaches who come to me get the correct intepretation and not some personal opinion. I have a real problem with intepreters and assignors who think that their interpretation is the one that should be used and not the correct interpretation.

The rules book and officials manual gives us a protocol to follow for resuming play situations. If it is followed, very rarely will you get to a point where you have to place the ball on the floor because the team who is to make the throw-in is still in its huddle.

More importantly, why should one team be allowed to continually flaunt the rules, while the other team follows the rules. Every time you let a team determine when it wants to break its huddle, that team will take longer and longer.

But lets look at the resuming play protocol.

Lets have Team A making a throw-in after the time-out.

1) The warning horn sounds. The officials step toward the team's huddles with one finger (not the middle one because the coach is a jerk) and announce first horn. While not required, it does not hurt to announce that the Captain should break his/her huddle.

1.1) Team A breaks its huddle at the warning horn and gets into position to make its throw-in.

2) The officials should take their appropriate positions on the court for the throw-in.

3) The horn signaling the end of the time-out sounds. Team A has broken its huddle at the warning horn and is in position to make its throw-in.

3.1) Team B is still in its huddle.

What should the officials do? Yes, it is very prudent that the non-adminsitering official should make one attempt to have Team B break its huddle. But only one attempt. Captain B and Coach B knows he/she should have had his/her team should have broken its huddle by now. If Team B does not break its huddle, then put the ball in play.

If Team B is still in its huddle after the time-out ending signal and refuses to break its huddle when told by the non-administering official it does no good for that official to stand there like a fool and keep telling Team B to break its huddle. If the officials stand there and keep telling Team B to break its huddle and does not put the ball into play until Team B does finally break its huddle, Team B will wait in its huddle every time-out until it is ready to play. This is a situation that no one wants, and it makes the officials look bad. If Team B gives up an uncontested layup because its Captain and/or Coach tries to circumvent the rules, I can guarantee you that Team B will be ready to play at the appropriate time for the next time-out.

There really is nothing difficult about following the protocol, what is difficult to understand is why would officals, interpreters, and assingors require their officals to be made fools by coaces like the one for Team B above.