End of game part 2
 

Okay, I saw something last night I've never seen in 15 years of officiating. This happened in the game prior to mine. Was watching. This will take a while to lay out, so be patient.

Less than 5 seconds left in regulation, team A down by 2. A1 scores with 2.8 seconds to tie game. Team B coach immediately calls timeout, C gives timeout and sounds whistle more than once and came running towards table, gym is loud and packed and nobody hears whistle, as timeout whistle is sounding, B1 is inbounding ball, and it is stolen by A1, A1 goes to shoot ball and is fouled by B1, official on endline calls foul, and gives intentional foul sign. All of this happening while the clock is running out.

So we have a timeout, clock doesn't stop, intentional foul prior to clock expiring. What are you going to do?

Gonna put 2.8, or whatever time I observed, back on the clock, and proceed with the timeout.

Meet with partners.

Explain to both coaches at the same time.

Award the timeout with 2.8. Everything else came after the timeout and is to be ignored.

If possible, avoid giving technical fouls to teams for coaches, players, and fans not being happy with the decision.

It doesn't matter whether anybody heard the initial whistle or not. The fact of the matter is the official (the C in this case) awarded Team B the timeout after the made basket. What happens after that is moot. Unless something flagrant happens, such as a fight.

For those saying you ignore everything after the unheard whistle, how do you reconcile the OP with 10-4-7?

Order of occurance.

Grant the timeout, and afterwards award the free throws and possession accordingly.

My point being that of the three prior answers: one answer specifically said you ignore everything after the timeout (which I assumed included the intentional foul), one suggested that you ignore everything unless flagrant (an intentional foul does not have to be flagrant), and one did not reference the foul at all.

How do you reconcile those positions with 10-4-7?

Sorry, I didn't include intentional fouls.

Unfortunately (in this case), intentional fouls are not ignored because the ball is dead. They just become T's. Intentional contact is always penalized.

Report the timeout. Report the T. Let the timeout occur. Resume after the timeout with FTs for the T.

Camron is correct. Also, restore the time to whatever the TO-granting official observed.

Have a conference with your partners to establish the following:
1) which team called the time out. (Team B)
2) where was the status of the ball when the timeout was granted. (assuming it was before the throw-in started)
3) how much time should be put back on the clock. (2.8 seconds)
4) are we SURE the foul was intentional?

Assuming the answer to #4 is yes, do the following:

• get both coaches together, tell them what's going to happen
• Do everything in your power to avoid giving the Team B coach a T after he/she goes nuts. ("How can my kid get charged a T when he didn't know the ball was dead?")
• put 2.8 back on the clock
• report the intentional Technical foul to B1
• grant Team B the timeout
• resume the game with 2 shots for any member of Team A, and a division-line throw-in for A after the shots.
• After the game ends, get out of the gym with much quickness.

If it's determined that the foul was NOT intentional:

• get both coaches together, tell them what's going to happen
• Do everything in your power to avoid giving the Team A coach a T after he/she goes nuts ("What do you mean that wasn't an intentional foul?")
• put 2.8 back on the clock
• grant Team B the timeout
• Resume the game with a Team B throw-in on the end line.
• After the game ends, get out of the gym with much quickness.

You forgot the most important part - call your assigner as soon as possible to alert him/her of the sh!tst0rm they are about to receive.

How exactly does one determine that a foul isn't an intentional foul after an official signals the foul as such?

It's pretty hard to undo this train wreck after the fact.

Of course if the other official didn't signal an INT at the spot, it would be *easy* to walk that back / ignore that.

Go to the guy that made the call and give him additional information. "Look, timeout was called and the ball was already dead. What have you got?"

Hopefully he'll say "Nothing, time out."

Oh, right, you don't think a signal actually means anything.

Signal is a signal. Show me something that says a signal is irreversible.

Maybe it isn't so hard....why was it intentional? Excessive contact? Or just neutralizing an obvious advantage?

If the latter there was no advantage to be neutralized since the ball was dead. I could see retracting that intentional since it no longer meets the definition of intentional. If it was excessive contact, however, that doesn't change because the ball was dead...charge it.

yep

This is an excellent point and wisely rules-based. But, say you walk back from the signal. How do you sum this up in one sentence or less to the incredulous coach who saw said signal?

Good question....very carefully and even so it will probably not be well received.

"Coach, intentional foul is a judgment call, and my judgment was based on the fact that I thought the ball was live, which I have just learned is not true."

Coach: "So if you thought it was an intentional foul live, wouldn't that be a technical or flagrant foul with a dead ball?"

"No"

I understand the concept that intentional contacting an opponent when the ball is dead is a technical foul, but does the absence of player knowledge concerning the status of the ball influence the call we would make in any other situation?

Exact same scenario, except instead of the intentional foul by B, A1 dunks the ball (or for fun, leave the intentional foul in the situation and A1 still dunks/attempts to dunk). The same lack of knowledge concerning the status of the ball still exists (and extends beyond just the players as you have an official still covering the play like it is a live ball). How many of us give A1 a T for attempting to dunk/dunking a dead ball?