Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef
Huh?  Do you resume a 5-second count after the time-out? How are the 2 situations related?
Quote:
|
Uh, no, which is exactly how the team would get the same advantage by calling that TO as calling a TO in the back court -- in each case it resets the count and creates an advantage for the team calling the TO (whether or not it is is an excess TO).
|
How about this. Team A up 3 points, gains BC possession with 15 seconds remaining. Team B knocks ball OOB in BC with 7 seconds left in game, and 2 seconds left on 10-second count. Team A then takes an excessive time-out.
You don't think that would benefit Team A? |
Who ever said there couldn't be a benefit?? What I said was: "I doubt there will be much concern about changing the rule unless there is a real incident -- how often is it really going to make sense to call that TO?" I didn't say it was hard to come up with scenarios where a coach might think it makes sense to do -- my point is, this will happen very rarely as there just aren't that many games where it is going to make sense. (If the ball is in play, coaches are generally not going to want to have to inbound the ball again instead of just moving into the front court; there are very few times the ball is going to get knocked out of bounds in the back court with less than 10 seconds left, with the team out of TOs and with a lead size that makes it make sense to take the T.) Rule changes require someone to care enough to change it.
And whether taking the T
really makes sense is an interesting question in many of these scenarios. Is it
really better to be up only two while having to inbound the ball against the press? Somewhat akin to the ever-present debate of when it makes sense for the defense to deliberately foul when up three in end game scenarios.