Bonus not double bonus

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Dad

Three seconds left in the game and you, in error, call 2 shots instead of a 1&1. Home is up by one point and is on the line. H1 misses shot and H2 is the only player who runs in for the rebound and gets the ball. Official brain farts, chops the clock, then blows his whistle after three seconds to correct the situation.

When my assigner calls me to chew me out on how I let my crew do this I'd rather have been the crew that put time on the clock. I'm sure it's different for other assigners, but I could see losing my varsity schedule for being the one to brain fart and then not putting time on the clock. I'm in trouble either way, but I'd pick put time on the clock.

So your assignor would rather have you screw up twice (awarding 2 shots instead of 1 and 1, and putting time back on the clock) rather than once (awarding 2 shots instead of 1 and 1) and then handling the situation by the rules because it seems more fair? He wont be the assignor long, since he, like the officials that handle the situation by putting time back on the clock, have absolutely no rules backing to do so.

[BlueDevilRef]

Why aren't officials errors allowed as a CE? Seems to me this sitch, putting ball in play to wrong team, and I'm sure some other things I'm not recalling, could be added to CE procedure to help the thought to "let the players decide the outcome". I don't want to confuse rules anymore than necessary but for those of you who have been around a while, have those ever been a CE or has it been discussed to add things to CE allowables?


I wish I had a cool signature

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I think it is pretty clear, using article 5, that time should not be put back on the clock. And I quote, "Points scored, consumed time, and additional activity, which may occur prior to the recognition of an error, shall not be nullified."

But we aren't discussing a correctable error here as defined in the rules to which that provision applies.

Interesting discussion - thanks all. And I guess this is another example of how there isn't necessarily a satisfactory answer when there is an officiating error. (Fortunately in my son's game it just didn't matter as only divine intervention or a bizarre technical foul could have given them a chance to win at that point.)

[Dad]

Originally Posted by johnny d

So your assignor would rather have you screw up twice (awarding 2 shots instead of 1 and 1, and putting time back on the clock) rather than once (awarding 2 shots instead of 1 and 1) and then handling the situation by the rules because it seems more fair? He wont be the assignor long, since he, like the officials that handle the situation by putting time back on the clock, have absolutely no rules backing to do so.

It's not that simple, imo.

He's the top assigner in the state and is a big timer with NFHS. I said what I would do in the situation I gave to attempt to fix screwing up the entire game. Is it a good choice? Ehh, idk, but I'm screwed anyway.

If I muck up a call this bad and it's a deciding factor in who wins the game -- goodbye schedule. We don't get to royally screw up a game around here and continue to officiate at a high level. At least for any given year, and yes some good collegiate officials have lost their HS schedules mucking up a game.

I royally mucked up a HS game once so far. I fixed it not following the rules so I wouldn't decide the game. I was fine with my decision and understood I'd be getting freshman games the rest of the year. Personally, I'd rather be punished for fixing my oops with missing two rules than I would being punished for one and deciding the game.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Dad

It's not that simple, imo.

He's the top assigner in the state and is a big timer with NFHS. I said what I would do in the situation I gave to attempt to fix screwing up the entire game. Is it a good choice? Ehh, idk, but I'm screwed anyway.

If I muck up a call this bad and it's a deciding factor in who wins the game -- goodbye schedule. We don't get to royally screw up a game around here and continue to officiate at a high level. At least for any given year, and yes some good collegiate officials have lost their HS schedules mucking up a game.

I royally mucked up a HS game once so far. I fixed it not following the rules so I wouldn't decide the game. I was fine with my decision and understood I'd be getting freshman games the rest of the year. Personally, I'd rather be punished for fixing my oops with missing two rules than I would being punished for one and deciding the game.

I agree with the sentiment, and I certainly wouldn't want to mess something up that badly at such a crucial time that it appears to be a deciding factor in who wins the game (I say appears, because I do not believe any one play can or should be considered the deciding factor for a game), and I realize that as an official, you are going to be screwed either way. However, I cannot see myself compounding one mistake, no matter how egregious, with another. I would rather bite the bullet and at least have the rules on my side as to what was done after the first mistake occurred.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

But we aren't discussing a correctable error here as defined in the rules to which that provision applies.

Interesting discussion - thanks all. And I guess this is another example of how there isn't necessarily a satisfactory answer when there is an officiating error. (Fortunately in my son's game it just didn't matter as only divine intervention or a bizarre technical foul could have given them a chance to win at that point.)

We are absolutely discussing a CE here.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Dad

Three seconds left in the game and you, in error, call 2 shots instead of a 1&1. Home is up by one point and is on the line. H1 misses shot and H2 is the only player who runs in for the rebound and gets the ball. Official brain farts, chops the clock, then blows his whistle after three seconds to correct the situation.

When my assigner calls me to chew me out on how I let my crew do this I'd rather have been the crew that put time on the clock. I'm sure it's different for other assigners, but I could see losing my varsity schedule for being the one to brain fart and then not putting time on the clock. I'm in trouble either way, but I'd pick put time on the clock.

Originally Posted by Dad

It's not that simple, imo.

He's the top assigner in the state and is a big timer with NFHS. I said what I would do in the situation I gave to attempt to fix screwing up the entire game. Is it a good choice? Ehh, idk, but I'm screwed anyway.

If I muck up a call this bad and it's a deciding factor in who wins the game -- goodbye schedule. We don't get to royally screw up a game around here and continue to officiate at a high level. At least for any given year, and yes some good collegiate officials have lost their HS schedules mucking up a game.

I royally mucked up a HS game once so far. I fixed it not following the rules so I wouldn't decide the game. I was fine with my decision and understood I'd be getting freshman games the rest of the year. Personally, I'd rather be punished for fixing my oops with missing two rules than I would being punished for one and deciding the game.

I realize that you were not the one who made the mistake in the OP, and nor was I. All that said, you're asking me a hypothetical of what would I do based on a scenario I'm certain I would not be in. The reason is because, especially at the end of a game, I am very clear about not only my communication with the crew, but also theirs with me. Nonetheless, if I found myself in this position, I would still follow the rules, and take the heat from coaches.

As for losing your varsity schedule, Well you should lose some games if you make this mistake at this point in a game. My concern would be not compounding one major error with a blatant disregard of the rules.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Your reference to 5.10.2 art 1, is actually Rule Book 5-10-1, and refers only to ". . . a mistake made by the timer . . ." In the situation being discussed, the mistake is by the officials, and not by the timer.
5-10-1 allows the timer to start the clock, ". . . if the official neglects to signal . . ."

5.10.2. says....or was not started/stopped properly. The clock wasn't started properly. I'm not married to the idea of putting time back on. I could see putting time back on, but not 100% sure.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I think it is pretty clear, using article 5, that time should not be put back on the clock. And I quote, "Points scored, consumed time, and additional activity, which may occur prior to the recognition of an error, shall not be nullified."

Was an unmerited free throw awarded? I don't think so, the second unmerited free throw never happened. The officials provided the wrong information. I don't believe this is a CE situation.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OKREF

This is for correctable error situations, and the play in the OP isn't a CE case.

yes it is. I'm not sure why it wouldn't be. It's the awarding of an unmerited free throw.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I agree with the sentiment, and I certainly wouldn't want to mess something up that badly at such a crucial time that it appears to be a deciding factor in who wins the game (I say appears, because I do not believe any one play can or should be considered the deciding factor for a game), and I realize that as an official, you are going to be screwed either way. However, I cannot see myself compounding one mistake, no matter how egregious, with another. I would rather bite the bullet and at least have the rules on my side as to what was done after the first mistake occurred.

It has to be egregious for me to fix it. 99% of the time I agree with you, but here's where I don't(opinion):

H is up by one. V hits the ball out of bounds with two seconds to go. I call H ball, but V runs out of bounds and I give it to them. V1 passes to V2 and V2 scores a basket - buzzer. Even if the rules don't allow me to fix this, I'm doing it anyway.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Adam

yes it is. I'm not sure why it wouldn't be. It's the awarding of an unmerited free throw.

If the 2nd free throw would have been shot, I would agree with you, however that never happened. How can you have an unmerited free throw when it was never taken?

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If the 2nd free throw would have been shot, I would agree with you, however that never happened. How can you have an unmerited free throw when it was never taken?

It was never taken, but by virtue of the incorrect announcement it was awarded.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by frezer11

It was never taken, but by virtue of the incorrect announcement it was awarded.

This would be my interpretation as well.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If the 2nd free throw would have been shot, I would agree with you, however that never happened. How can you have an unmerited free throw when it was never taken?

It was awarded when the administering official stated "two shots." It was not corrected until after the clock started. Otherwise, what's the basis for stopping play at all?