I don't think so. I remember before the 2016-17 season there was discussion to do away with the HC requesting time outs during a live ball because of the problems it was causing (table-side) officials in particular. Coaches were "requesting" TO's during PC but on occasion, officials, while verifying it was the HC, ended up "granting" TO's while the ball had become airborne on a try or pass, loose on the floor, jointly held by two opponents and in some cases stolen by the opponent. The Point of Emphasis was for officials to "ensure" player control status prior to granting the requested time out. (which infers checking again before granting) That's the way I remember it being explain at our state interpreter's meeting. We were also told that coaches in our state were told the same thing in their required online state rules meeting and that they must understand officials cannot always immediately grant requests until they ensure there is PC.

That may be what you remember was explained, but the POE, which someone posted above, doesn’t say to rme check for PC a second time. (Not, frankly, does it make a whit of sense.). But I still think the whole thing should be avoided by not letting coaches call TOs....

I wouldn't get hung up on that. All the POE is saying is before you grant the time out, make sure there is still player control. I would guess even when the ball is not in your PCA, 95 percent of the time we already know (peripheral) if the ball is being held, dribbled or airborne on a pass or try without being a ball-watcher. So when the request is made: verify it was the HC, make sure there is PC and grant the TO. That's one check. Feel better? And I agree, eliminate TO's by HC's during live ball.

Nothing better then giving a coach a TO and his player makes a shot lol

I am not going back through the thread and make a lot of multi-quotes. But I am going to clarify some of the various points made in this thread.

I) When the Ball is Dead: Either Team can Request a TO.

A) Any of the ten Players on the Court may Request a TO.

B) Either HC may Request a TO.


II) When the Ball is Live: Only the Team that has Control (TC) of the Ball can Request a TO.

A) The Request must be made when a Player as Control (PC) of the Ball.

B) Any of the five Players on the Court may Request a TO.

C) The HC may Request a TO.


III) Verification of the Status of the Ball when a TO Request is made.

A) After a Made FGA or FTA:

1) Is the Ball Dead? Or

2) Is the Ball at the Disposal of the Thrower (i.e., the Ball is Live)?

B) The Ball is Live. (If the Ball is Dead see Item (I) above.)

1) Is there TC by either Team?

a) No. The TO Request cannot be Granted.

b) Yes.

i) Is there PC? No: The Request cannot be Granted. Yes: The Request can be Granted.


IV) When there is TC and a Player Requests a TO it is relatively easy, most of the time, to quickly verify that there is PC when the Request is made. Why? Before the NFHS and NCAA Men's Rules Committees amended the TO Rule to also allow HCs to request a TO, rarely did Players, on their own initiative, request a TO (Think Chris Webber, 1993 NCAA Men's National Championship Game; Jeff I am sorry to have to reference this game.). HCs, close to 100% of the time, instructed their Players when to request a TO.

Amending the TO Rule really did not change the dynamic as to when a Team requested a TO or the Officials protocol as to how a TO Request is handled. It only allowed one more person the ability to request a TO.


V) Recent POEs have only highlighted BBB important aspects of a Live Ball TO Request:

A) The Request cannot be Granted unless there is PC by a Player of the Team with TC,

B) Do not immediately Grant the Request unless made by the Player in PC, or

C) When there is PC and the Request is made by a Player other than the Player in PC or by the HC, verify that the request was made by a Player of the HC of the Team with TC.

1) If the Request is by a Player or HC of the Team not in TC, ignore the Request and let play continue.

2) If the Request is by a Player or HC of the Team in TC, Grant the Request, any thing that happened between the Time that the Request was made and the Time that it was actually Granted is ignored unless it is an IF, FF by either Team.

a) For all intents and purposes the Ball has become Dead retroactively (The word "retroactive" is, I believe, best word that describes the situation.), and

b) See Item (III-B-1-b-i) above.


Side Note 1: There have been a few comments in this Thread and many older Threads making the recommendation that the Article defining who can Request a TO be amended to return to its "ancient" requirement of only Players can Request a TO, and the most given reason is that it just adds to the Game Officials duties during Live Ball action during the game. I can truthfully say that there is no member of this Forum that has more experience with this Rule than me. The Rule amended portion that was added to the NFHS and NCAA Men's Rules was adopted (in the late 1980s if my memory serves me correctly because I do not have access to my attic right now) from the NCAA Women's Rules that was part of the NAGWS Basketball Rules that was adopted by the NCAA Women's Rules Committee when the Committee was formed in 1982 or 1983. The Rule predates my becoming a women's college basketball official in 1974, and I seriously doubt that anyone else in the Forum was officiating women's college basketball back then. NAGWS Basketball Rules was also used by some State in the Northeast for girls' H.S. but I think that by the 1980s that was no more. None-the-less, my position has always been that I could care less about the Rule amendment because I already had considerable experience with administering it.


Side Note 2: There is a historical discussion to be made as to why HCs could not make TO Requests in boys'/girls' H.S. and men's college, but that is for another time and day.


MTD, Sr.

What I believe MTD is saying:
TO request > Verify > Grant > Ignore infractions or change of ball status that may occur during verifying. Ball becomes dead “retroactively” to request.

What I believe the rules say:
TO request > Verify > Ensure PC > Grant: See Rule 5-8-3a and 6-7 DEAD BALL (note there is no rule statement or case play to support ball becoming dead “retroactively” to time of request.

Situations to Consider:

Play 1.
A1 is dribbling very near the sideline opposite the table. HC requests a TO. As the tableside official turns to verify, the ball lands on the sideline. The official opposite and the unaware tableside official simultaneously sound their whistles, one to signal the violation, the other to signal the TO. How would you rule this?

Play 2.
A1 is holding the ball opposite the table. HC requests a TO. As the tableside official turns to verify, B2 gets a firm grip on the ball. Both officials simultaneously sound their whistles, one for a held ball, the unaware tableside official for a TO. How would you rule this?

Play 3.
A1 is holding the ball opposite the table. HC requests a TO. As the tableside official turns to verify, B2 pokes the ball away from A1 and grabs the ball out of the air. The unaware tableside official sounds the whistle and grants the TO. How would you rule this?

No timeout in situation 1, because there was no player control immediately after the request (by rule, I could say simultaneously with the request, because simultaneous does not mean "at exactly the same time", rather "at the same time, or shortly afterwards"). This was similar to a situation I had where a coach requested a timeout, but as soon as I heard the request, the player with the ball stepped on the sideline. I understood that he requested the timeout to save possession because his player was pressured, but there was no possession to save once the player stepped on the sideline.

No timeout in situation 2, because the officials need to determine who is entitled to possession. A held ball is in joint possession of both players and both teams, so no one team has the required player and team control to request a live-ball timeout. \

I would administer situation 3 as an inadvertent whistle, because the necessary condition for the timeout (player and team control) does not exist.

If the coach of the originally requesting team would request timeout again after the officials indicated the resumption of play (which direction the ball would go next), I would grant it, but I would not allow the original requests because player control was lost at the time of the requests.

I hear the request prior to the OOB violation I'm hitting my whistle and saying "prior to going out-of-bounds, time-out Team A coach".

So...

After a made basket by team A you hear team B's coach yelling (or at least someone from team B's bench yelling), you turn to see what's up and find he is yelling for a timeout. You hit your whistle for the timeout, however at this point B1 has already inbounded the ball.

Obviously you grant the timeout, but are you going to allow team B to run the baseline after the timeout since the coach had requested the timeout before the ball was inbounded? Or since you can't, by rule, retroactively grant the timeout is the ensuing throw in going to be a spot throw in?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Just had this situation in a college game. We agreed request came prior to throw-in and gave Team B the right to run the end line.

That's what I've done as it's happened every once in a while.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

NFHS and NCAA Men's & Women's: Grant Team A's request for a TO for all three Plays. A1 had PC at the moment that A-HC made his request for TO in all three Plays. Everything that happened between the moment that the TO Request was made and the moment that that the TO was Granted is not relative.

MTD, Sr.

You would grant Team B's TO Request and allow the Throw-in to be made anywhere along the End Line as long as Team B's TO Request was made before the Throw-in after Team A's FG had not ended.

MTD, Sr.

This is what I meant all along, as that post was meant to be rhetorical towards the person talking about not retroactively giving a time out.

Sorry for not making that clear.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Bryan:

Welcome to my world where my fingers either too fast of my brain or my brain things too slow for my fingers. And at my age it is usually the latter, LOL.

MTD, Sr.