CE offense loses a posession
 

What am I missing in the CE situation. A is fouled, should get the ball out of bounds, shoot FTs, then discovered, then B gets the ball? Doesn't seem fair.

A1 is fouled prior to the bonus, but erroneously A1 is awarded the one-and-one penalty. The error is discovered after (e) B1 has secured the rebound following A1’s unsuccessful second free throw.

Ruling(e): the successful free throws are canceled. Play resumes with a throw-in awarded to Team B since Team B had the ball inbounds when the game was interrupted for the correction.

What's confusing. You correct the error and go to POI. The correction is for unmerited FT's, thats the CE.

I don't know that the rules makers had this in mind when they wrote the rule, but it helps me to remember it:

The rule is such that BOTH teams should do what they can to get the ruling right before play continues. Otherwise, what looks like an advantage ("hey -- good news -- we are getting FTs instead of a throw-in") can quickly turn into a disadvantage ("what do you mean we lose the points and the ball!?")

I never have, and never will, buy that line of thinking. NEVER. It is ludicrous logic, IMO. That is penalizing a team b/c the crew and table screwed up. It is not the coaching staffs' responsibility. I could just as easily say that it is advantageous for the defensive team to allow the FTs and then after they inbound the ball notify the table and crew that there should not have been any FTs. The team shooting FTs could just as easily assume that they missed annotating an opponent's foul on their own stat sheet. And what about visiting teams that do not bring a scorer with them (I've seen plenty of HS and JuCo teams who don't travel with any type of bookkeeping personnel). They are trusting that the table and officials are competently doing their jobs.

Feel free to propose different logic /reasons for the rule. As I said, this helps me remember it. Too many try to revert to the "what's fair" provision -- and get the ruling screwed up.

Personally, I don't care what the rule is... I'm going by it. However, isn't part of the error not giving Team A a throw in? And not having done that should be corrected?

Admittedly, I would have messed this up before reading this. I would have cancelled the made free throw and given Team A a throw-in at the spot nearest where the foul occurred.

Your errors are a-e. The error here is awarding unmerited FTs. (b) Cancel the FTs and go to POI. Correctable errors are bad. many times somebody is going to get screwed. It makes me communicate better with scorers and periodically check if all are on same page.

It's why I am very diligent in keeping track of Team Fouls. On a regular basis I am having the table correct the TF count on the scoreboard. Some folks think it is not our job to do so, but this rule is exactly why a good official should.

I think I found in the rule book where you would do this, as there's nothing that simply says "cancel the FTs and go to the POI".

2-10-4 says that "the activity during it (the unmerited FT), other than unsporting, flagrant, intentional, and technical fouls, shall be cancelled". And 2-10-5 says that "consumed time and additional activity...shall not be nullified". Therefore, in this case the made FT is cancelled per 2-10-4, and the fact Team B secured the rebound/gained possession is not nullified per 2-10-5.

I agree with you for the most part, but tables often screw this up or give us the wrong information. We should ask questions when getting close, but the table people do give us information wrong even when you think "you" are right.

I once had two CE situations in one week (over 15 years ago) and both times we questioned the table about what was on the scoreboard, only to have them tell us we were to do something wrong both times. Actually these situations helped me learn the rules because the table was not giving us the proper information.

This is not like football where we can write down our penalties each time. I guess we could, but that would require a lot from us.

Peace

I gave you the condensed version for the OP. 2-10-6 says POI.

You could make the same argument if you give the ball to B. B earned a rebound and has the ball. If you give the ball back to A, you take that away from B.

Either way you go, once the ball is back in play, one team will get something taken away.

What rebound? The free throw that was rebounded was taken away.

But, it was rebounded. B earned the ball at that moment. Why should A get it any more than B?

Would you have also put time back on the clock that elapsed after the free throws were completed?