1.9 Sec left in Playoff game TO Granted with none left leads to Coach Ejection (Video

[Adam]

Until we get to zero, the only thing I'm curious about is if they still have a choice on timeout length. I'll try to track when they're out of each so I don't have to bother asking the coach.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Amesman

This. Along with what rbruno illustrated.

Tell them when they've got none left ... otherwise, don't say anything.

I am only telling them if I am told they are out. If the table never says a thing, I am not saying a word. Most of the time the coaches will say when you ask for "What kind of timeout coach...." they often say, "I only have a full (or 30) left." So to me they know what their timeout situation is most of the time anyway.

Peace

[bucky]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And they can go to the table like they do with everything else they want to know.
Peace

Everything else? They can only go to table to seek info on correctable error situations. Anything else, like checking on number of TO's, is a technical foul.

By case anyway.....This falls directly under the "If some rules are never enforced, then why do they exist?" category.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bucky

Everything else? They can only go to table to seek info on correctable error situations. Anything else, like checking on number of TO's, is a technical foul.

By case anyway.....This falls directly under the "If some rules are never enforced, then why do they exist?" category.

Yes, they can go to the table, which often in my experience is literally right next to the benches, along with people from both teams sharing that information. This also does not require anyone to physically walk to the table or even get up to have information shared with them. It is only a T if you leave the coaching box, which is pure semantics as benches are usually so close to the table they could reach out and touch the table without violating any rule. Coaches or assistants all the time ask, "How many fouls does he have?" And the table talks back to them with the information they asked for.

Also not sure what rules you suggest are never enforced. The rule for timeouts requires the scorer to inform the officials that they are out of timeouts. I have had this discussion here before, often that is clearly not necessary as they already know they are out of timeouts as the conversation between the officials and the table on this matter is not a secret. Assistants also know they are out of timeouts and they make it clear they are out of timeouts or they ask on their own. Heck I have had opponents tell me that the other team is out of timeouts. This is not rocket science here, people count timeouts just like they count other things. We really make stuff like this too complicated. At least that is in my experience.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rbruno

Can you ignore the request ... knowing that the team has no timeouts and it would result in a technical foul? Just sayin...

Do your ignore contact fouls too just because they are dumb fouls, especially when the other team is in the bonus?

Do you ignore when a player steps OOB even though they had plenty of room to stay inbounds but were not paying attention?

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Do your ignore contact fouls too just because they are dumb fouls, especially when the other team is in the bonus?

Do you ignore when a player steps OOB even though they had plenty of room to stay inbounds but were not paying attention?

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bucky

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

Alleged?

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by bucky

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many inexperienced officials would have incorrectly ignored this alleged TO request.

Went ahead and amended that statement for you. And to echo Rich, Alleged? There was a TO request. It was recognized and granted. End of that part of the story.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bucky

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

Those situations where ignoring the rules is prescribed are for when the team violating the rules would benefit from having it enforced...where calling the rules as written would not satisfy the intent of the rules but would do the opposite.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And what difference was that going to make?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Whenever I do that, the coach almost immediately tells his players not to request a timeout.

Asked and answered.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The rule for timeouts requires the scorer to inform the officials that they are out of timeouts.

Almost got it, don't forget about the rest of the rule:

NFHS: The scorer shall: Record the time-out information charged to each team (who and
when) and notify a team and its coach, through an official, whenever that team is
granted its final allotted charged time-out.

Note: I don't believe that this happened in this specific situation (the coach was probably informed), but if either the table, or the officials, didn't do what they are, by (NFHS) rule, supposed to do, then there is some blame, in varying amounts, to be shared by the coach, the player, the table, and the officials, for the disaster that followed, mainly on the coach, and the player, but if I were that official who was informed by the table and then failed to inform the coach, I would not have a totally guilt free drive home that night, "Man, I wish I had informed the coach that he had used all of his timeouts". (I don't know what the NCAA rule is.) If the table does what it's supposed to do, and if the officials do what they are supposed to do, then it takes both of them out of the equation, blameless for the subsequent disaster, putting 100% of the blame on the coach and/or the player.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BigT

I meant this situation where a kid calls a time out and they get a technical that is not at the coach.

I'm definitely going to be near the coach b/c I'll probably need to explain exactly what happened and the adjudication.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by bucky

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

Alternative facts?

[U99]

Let me answer a few questions:

The "new rule" nobody between lane lines. Game administration was asked to keep that area free for the game. The main entry way is there as well as the snack bar and bathrooms. They stopped people there while the play was occurring on that end. Each opportunity they had, they moved people in the gym and away from that area, as we also did many times.

Benches. Due to staircases and the layout of the gym the benches have always been moved to where you see them. Not the best scenario, but the home team management places the benches (1-13-1). This was the last game in this gym as the new one is almost finished.

The play:

The foul at 0:01.9 was a hard foul, but a basketball play. Nothing intentional or flagrant. (Double whistle) The trainer for white ran onto the court. When #5 went to the line to shoot and realized he was staying into the court, one official went to St. Augustine coach to let him know he needed to call a timeout to keep his player in the game or to sub him (3-2-6). He called a time out.

First free throw made. Foothills Christian (black) calls their final timeout. The scorer notifies FCHS head coach that is his last timeout and he acknowledges in front of the official.

Second free Throw missed and rebounded by FCHS #5. Prior to securing the rebound, but knowing that #5 will get it as he is all alone, #3 turns to the new trail and begins yelling "time-out" many times progressively louder and by signaling visually multiple times for a time-out. The request is granted. In addition as FCHS was walking to their bench you can see that #1 is also signaling time-out.

As the calling official goes to report the timeout, signaling toward the black team's bench (it was very loud in the gym) the head coach for FCHS gets in the way of the official and doesn't allow him to get to report. (The scorers table is two rows up into the stands, so all officials had to be a little closer to the sideline when reporting during loud moments). As the coach is screaming "no he didn't, no he didn't" the official tells the coach to return to the bench and let the crew get together as the game is not over. The coach ignores the request and continues on to the official repeating the same thing. The official repeats to the coach that the game is NOT over and to please allow us to figure it (technical foul, resumption of play, time remaining, etc) out. He continues coming at the official finally snapping his head and yelling "bulls**t". (So much for the newspaper and CIF report of no profanity) The calling official now gives an unsporting technical foul to the head coach of FCHS. The coach turns away and goes to his bench. As the official is (finally) reporting the excessive time out and the unsporting technical, FCHS head coach returns to scream at the calling official, "How can you call that!" over and over. The calling official now walks toward the semi-circle at half court but feeling the coach follow him, decides to turn around for his own safety. The official backs up to the other sideline and (finally) with no place left to go, looks over the shoulder of the coach to his partner who gives him his second (and disqualifying) technical foul and ejects him.
Time remaining was 1.9 at the initial final free Throw. The crew decided that they would take off 0:00.4 resulting in 0:01.5 showing on the clock.

FCHS #1 leaving the gym. During an intermission or a time-out all players are considered bench personnel (4-34-2). The requirement of not leaving the playing court or bench area is for an unauthorized reason. (10-6-6). An assistant coach retrieved #1 and he returned to the game as a player following the time-out. The crew was not going to specifically ask the reason why he left, as there may have been a legal reason.

I hope all questions were answered here. I will not comment or reply on anything regarding crew chemistry, comments of partners not doing their job or anything else negative. The crew talked about many things in the post game. In addition, two state evaluators were in the gym, and the post game as well as the association president and many other officials.
Thank you.

[U99]

Mark Ziegler from the San Diego Tribune posts this on his twitter feed https://mobile.twitter.com/Jack10Spe...680832/video/1

Crazy End to San Diego H.S. Basketball Game | NBC 7 San Diego

sandiegoinformer.com/37130/playoff-game-ends-in-chaos-coach-ejected-Chris-Webber-moment-foothills-Christian-v-st-Augustine-San-diego-videos/

High School Basketball Team Loses After Getting Charged with 3 Technical Fouls | Bleacher Report

www.sbnation.com/look it/2017/3/2/14792048/san-diego-high-school-basketball-chris-webber-timeout-chaos-video

VIDEO: Wild Calif. playoff finish includes a Chris Webber moment and coach ejection | | USA Today High School Sports

I think that's all of them lol.