Who should call the timeout.
 

I wonder what others think regarding this situation. 2 point game girls high school varsity game last minute. The winning team is trying to break the press and the ball is still in the back court. The winning team's coach is trying to call a timeout. Who should grant that time out? The ref(still the lead/ transitioning to the trail) who has the play directly in front of him and is table side or the C who is the opposite side? This is obviously 3 man. Neither team is in the bonus yet.

Very oddly worded. How does new lead have play in front of him when ball is in backcourt? And what does bonus sitch have to do with this? Would think C or new T would have best view. To me, new T would also be closest to both audibly and visually verify the request and grant.


I wish I had a cool signature

Just came back to finish it. The lead called a foul before the timeout was granted. The lead did not want to leave the play in front of him and did not get a visual of the coach.

C has a perfect view of both coaches and this is an obvious time where you could have a time out. Would be interesting if I could see a video of what the C was doing and how long before the foul the coach wanted a time out.

Who ever hears the request and visually confirms that the winning HC is the one requesting the TO. In a tight game during a press situation, don't hold a whistle because you're waiting for your P to call a TO that's 'his.'

This!

The T and C, since there is a press, may very well be focused on intense pressure in the backcourt. It is a very close game and just because neither team is in the bonus doesn't mean the team trailing will not foul...especially if the offense appears to be on the verge of getting the ball into the front court. Add to that it may be a loud gym and these coaches may be the type to have plays/instructions that sound like "time out".

We are a team out there. I understand that either the T or C "should" be the best ones to grant the time out but every official is responsible for game management.

By the way...a coach cannot "call" a timeout...they can only request one.

Maybe you mean "new trail" (you seem to have L and T mixed up a lot in this thread, or I am just envisioning it wrong) for this. I agree this official is least likely to grant the coach's request.

But C and L can both get it. C can see opposite and New L should be standing fairly close to the coach.

All officials need to be aware that it's a prime opportunity for a TO request.

Transitioning to the trail probably meant new trail.

I need the OP re-written so I can understand what was going on. "The winning team is trying to break the press and the ball is still in the back court." / "still the lead/ transitioning to the trail" :confused:

I don't think that is necessary... Does the situation really determine who grants the TO? Whomever hears and sees the coach asking for the TO should blow the damn whistle..

If there is something in the officials manual that says something different please show me where to find it.

No, the situation determines who is in the better position to be looking and listening to the coach. If action is that intense, the L should be looking. The OP is asking (I think) which official should be looking and then incorrectly (we think) labels the officials.

BNR isn't trying to be a dick, he's trying to understand the question better so he can answer it.

And to make it clear I didn't think that anyone was trying to be a dick.... and neither an I.

I realize that one MAY BE in a better position but it still should be the one that sees and hears the request being made regardless of his position on the floor.

I really didn't think you were, or that you were accusing him of doing it. I was being a bit proactive, I suppose, knowing where these things tend to go. It wasn't really fair to you to put it in there, though.

Well, if there is a trap going on in the BC, the person with the least going on at that moment is almost always going to be the new Lead. If I'm him, I'm keeping an eye on the coach. Plus since this is the end of the game, the Lead is also going to be closest to the HC requesting the time-out.

Not really true. Sometimes it'll be the case.

Wow this takes "you must only use rule book language" to an entirely new level.

Do you just answer to be contradictory? If it is only sometimes, please explain.

Half the time the C should be closest to the coach when the lead is opposite table side. The other half the coaches are in your field of vision.

I'm fine with the lead getting it, but I think the C is picking this up a lot.

This all goes back to why coaches shouldn't be permitted to call, er, request time outs when the ball is live . . . maybe it's just me watching through daddy goggles or the games I'm watching, but it seems to me that referees (I'm watching HS JV) too often grant the coach's "save my player" TOs when the player has already lost control and does not regain control, which I have thought was likely because they had to split attention . . .

It's the 2nd half, last minute of the game, 2 point difference. There is a press in the BC, which means the C SHOULD be helping the Trail with press coverage in the BC. The offensive HC is in the FC. The new Lead is either across the court and can see the offensive HC in his direct line of site, or he is on the same sideline and the offensive HC is in earshot.

I'm in line for all of this, but as the C I'm calling this a lot on a good disciplined press. With this specific play and the game being so close and easily decided on a single play, I'm not ignoring the coach. I'm not focusing on him, but you know when a time out is coming from a good coach within the second, usually.

Even when the Lead calls the TO it's a good idea to be aware of what's going on, given it won't distract you from the play you're watching.

This isn't a reason to change a pivotal role coaches play in coaching their team. If a crew messes this up, which I've seen to be extremely rare, it's not a basis for completely changing the game.

No one is saying to ignore the coach. But I would hope the official with the least going on in his primary would have the most awareness if the coach starts requesting a time-out. Knowing what's going on with the ball before granting the time-out is a given.

NCAA found a reason to change the rule. And rules are written by coaches, ADs, and conference commissioners.

I was referring to the specific reason.

As for the NCAA change, I really think it's a poor change to the game. They did come forward with some decent reasoning, but I'm not a fan. Almost all the issues could've been solved with enforcement of rules and/or better officiating.

For instance??

Normally I'd delete this post because of the word I just deleted, but I agree with this mindset so wholeheartedly, I'll just edit it.

:eek: Coaches were quite able to coach when I played and they had to tell us to call the TO. Indeed, it even meant they had to teach us when we would want time outs, when we should call them on our own, etc. IMO, granting the coaches the right to request time outs during play was one of the dumbest "innovations" ever added to the game (I'd add the possession arrow, too, except for middle school and below . . .) and increases the view that the game is about the coaches. The coach requesting the TO directly isn't about coaching, its about the coach wanting to be involved in play. Really, really stupid. Coaches should be coaching -- that is TEACHING -- the players what to do, not doing it for them.

I didn't say the scenario presented is the reason coaches shouldn't be allowed to request time outs, but it is an example of distracting referees by making them divert attention off the court to accommodate the coach. Eliminating the stupid rule change is not "completely changing the game," it is returning the game to where it belongs.

YMMV.

I can respect this stance. There are some nuances of the game I really enjoy and coaches calling TOs is one of them.

Your mileage may vary? What?

And I fall on the side of liking coaches calling timeouts. I officiated in both eras -- and when they let the coach call timeouts, it made things easier overall for me.

Back then we heard a coach yelling and then had to find a player on the floor asking for one. The change just eliminated the middle man.

It's not a drastic change to the game. it's not as if we're asking for the FIBA rule. And crews mess this up very rarely. Normally, a coach is crying because we don't acknowledge a TO request made while we HAVE to be watching the action instead of him.

Make the players call it during live balls, and all this goes away. Hell, if the coaches would teach players to mirror their requests, this would go away as well.

Hacked ???
 

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.: Why are you posting under so cal lurker's username?

Timeout ...
 

I agree with BatteryPowered. A head coach, or a player, may request a timeout, but only an official can grant a timeout. The distinction is important, especially in the heat of the moment.

I don't think this makes anything go away. You'll still have quick thinking players yelling they were calling time outs. Or the coach yelling TO and then yelling at you for not seeing/hearing A3 trying to get a TO.

I just can't see any net gain from making a change. All I see are headaches while teams adapt.

3 pages. Wow. Figured this one would be a one-response topic. "Whichever referee sees it."

I don't recall that happening under the prior rule.

I do like, in theory at least, the NCAAM rule -- for those who work under that code, how has it been working?

Thanks for all the replies. It sparked a major discussion between myself and the other officials involved. It seems to have done the same here. The whole thing started with you know you should have got that timeout before the foul. I was like really I didn't know there was an area for granting a time out

Agree, bob. I've been doing this long enough to have done it under both rules. The only problems before were the players not hearing and/or responding to the coach.

Coaches should coach, not play the game. Having them directly able to affect live action events is not coaching.

It's semantics. Nothing new around here, though.

The players weren't hearing the request, so they changed the rule to allow the referee to grant the coaches' requests directly. Now, when officials don't hear them, the coach has something to complain about.

And whoever said coaches should teach their players to mirror their request is exactly right. How many officials are going to miss when six people are asking for a timeout?

I know some that might! :eek:

It hasn't been a problem. I hear a Coach calling for a timeout and I look for the first player giving any kind of indication. Coaches have already adapted. And I pregame for us to be aware.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

It works very well. Don't have to take eyes off the players. Don't have to worry about hearing a coach....I wish high school would go back to it.

If it's a press in the backcourt, the guy most likely to be able to see and grant the time out would be the lead. The trail and C are with the press.

Frankly, I wonder why this is such a problem. I've worked under both systems, and it's just easier giving the coach the ability to call the timeouts himself.

The real best answer. :D

Ain't that the truth. :rolleyes:

Whoever sees or hears it is the obvious answer to the simple question. The situational question is who should be most aware in this scenario.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk