Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Actually, the case play states that IF a time-out request IS ERRONEOUSLY GRANTED when a team isn't entitled to ask for one, then it is charged and taken.
That's a big difference from what you wrote.
|
I thought I was saying the same thing. There has to be a request for there to be a granting. If there's no request, there's no granting, no matter how erroneously. Think of the coach yelling for the "Side out!" play, and the official blows the whistle to grant a TO. That's an inadvertant whistle, not a granting of a request.
In zm1283's case, the coach was making the request while the ball was on the rim, and zm correctly waited and did not grant the request at that time. Once the ball was secured by a player, zm blew the whistle to grant the TO, but there was no request being made at that moment. So if there's no request, it's an IW, correct? In an extreme example, let's say A has the ball and is passing the ball around in the front court. B's coach is frustrated about the defense and requests a TO. The official correctly does not blow the whistle for the TO. 10 seconds later, the ball gets thrown OOB, and the official grants B's request for a TO. I believe that would be incorrect, as there is no request being made at that moment.
That's the point I was trying to make, in that the period of time the request was made and ignored passed, then another period of time exisits where there is no request being made and the whistle is blown. In zm's case, he does say "maybe one second" passes, so I can see how it may be too close to ignore, it is still during that same time period, and the TO is granted. But there should be some judgement in allowing a period of time to pass, the situation changes, and therefore the period of time the request was made has passed.