[Daryl H. Long]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

If the T had granted the timeout like he should have, there would have been no timing problem.

[/B]

I agree that the trail shoulda called the TO. There was no reason to ignore the request(especially twice), and I imagine that whoever was evaluating the game probably brought that fact up to the T. Basically, though, this really isn't relevant to this sitch, is it? It's just a missed call, and you can't give it CPR and bring it back to life, can you?

But, in this sitch, the L finally did grant the TO request with one second to go. The timer then ran the one second off. As this was a high school game, would you really put the second back up after the FT's for the T and have a throw-in? Or was I reading your post wrong? [/B][/QUOTE]

JR:

I will reply as if I were the calling official. Even though an excess TO by Team W was requested I am bound by rule to honor the request. Knowing time is running out I glance at the clock and see 1.0 seconds. Having definite knowledge of time I will put that time back on the clock. (lag time does not apply in this case)

1. Put 1.0 seconds on the clock.
2. Team L: 2 FT's (any player)
3. Team L throwin at division line opposite table.
4. Let the game play itself out.

Possible scenarios: Team W will now be forced to steal inbound pass or foul to have any chance to win or force OT depending on result of FT's. We have all seen bizarre endings to games. Maybe someone on Team L will request a timeout during the Throwin to avoid the 5 second violation.