Bonus not double bonus

[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."

[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.)

[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.

[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.

[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?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

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?

I disagree. It isn't awarded until is taken. The basis for stopping play is basically fairness by way of interpretation, not by any specific rule. The only way to stop the clock otherwise would be to declare the ball to have been dead on the miss and then we'd be putting time back.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I disagree. It isn't awarded until is taken. The basis for stopping play is basically fairness by way of interpretation, not by any specific rule. The only way to stop the clock otherwise would be to declare the ball to have been dead on the miss and then we'd be putting time back.

In that case, we'd have to put time back in order to justify stopping play. Am I missing an interp on this?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by OKREF

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.

The NFHS has stated in previous rulings included in the past interpretations archive that a situation such as this is not a CE. Announcing the wrong info is not the same as actually administering an unmerited FT. This is simply an officials' mistake.

[BlueDevilRef]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS has stated in previous rulings included in the past interpretations archive that a situation such as this is not a CE. Announcing the wrong info is not the same as actually administering an unmerited FT. This is simply an officials' mistake.

And again, I ask....why aren't these type of mistakes errr, ERRORS, correctable? Have they ever been or has it been discussed to add them as such?


I wish I had a cool signature

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

And again, I ask....why aren't these type of mistakes errr, ERRORS, correctable? Have they ever been or has it been discussed to add them as such?


I wish I had a cool signature

Because it's not one of the 5 correctable errors. Simple enough.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

And again, I ask....why aren't these type of mistakes errr, ERRORS, correctable? Have they ever been or has it been discussed to add them as such?


I wish I had a cool signature

Not in my 17 years of officiating. The NFHS and NCAA have stuck with the five CE situations. That's it. Everything else is a mistake by the officials. Some of those can be fixed, others can't and you are stuck with them.

Sports isn't perfect. It is a human activity that is going to be flawed. Mistakes are part of the game.