Notifying the head coach when a team is granted its final time-out
 

Most posters on this forum know the rule which states that one of the duties of the officials is to notify the head coach when the team has used its final allowable time-out. We have also discussed on this forum several times the trouble that could arise if officials get involved in the courtesy of incoming coaches of how many time-outs they have left other than zero.
Thought that I would share an illustrative case of such from this weekend.


The following are posts from a message board about a MLK showcase game.
==========
Game 3 Final

Bear Creek - 59
Cardinal Newman - 64
=========

Heard that the Bear Creek coach called a timeout he didn't have that took away Bear Creek's chance to win it late ... if so, that's pretty much inexcusable unless his scorekeeper told him he had a timeout when he really didn't.
==============

that is what happened. tie game less than 20 seconds left. before the 2nd free coach asked for a time out. did not have any. there was not anyone on his bench keeping the book.

==============
it was a terrible way to end a great game...

BC scored to tie the game with 7 secs left. CN inbounded the ball and Dural was fouled with 4.8 secs left. (double bonus).

She missed the 1st one... then BC timeout...technical 2 shots and ball.

Dural makes 2nd to give CN 1 pt lead. Choice hits both technical foul shots...CN up 3. CN inbounds to Cargill, fouled, and she hits both fouls shots.. 5 pt lead.

The technical foul robbed BC the chance to win the game on last possession down 1 (with no tech)

unfortunate way for a very good game to end

===============
I am the BC coach, and I never get on these boards, but lets set the record straight:

1st and foremost it was a great game, but after I called my last timeout, the referee came over to my huddle and told us we had 1 timeout remaining (which we have on video, and will be sending to the ref assigner for NCS). Also the scorers table at BOD is 20+ feet above where we sit, so we had no correspondence with our stat keeper. It was an unfortunate turn of events, but it happened.

Big shot out to Cardinal Newman, they are very well coached team. We wish them the best of luck in their playoff run.

Bear Creek (or Bear Valley as we were disrespectfully called) was an irrelevant program three years ago, and now competes with teams at the highest level. I am so proud of these girls and how they continue to work hard and build pride for both their school and the entire Stockton area.
==========

I had the opposite situation last week. The table told me the V coach had used his last TO so I let his assistant know. V coach gave me a weird look, so we checked the book at the table and the H book, which matched V coach's.

Turns out the table had charged V with a TO the H coach took in the first half. To me this was a perfect example of the officials doing the right thing, coaches being on top of it (H coach actually called out the error), and working well with your table crew. Nobody was upset, just glad we got it right.

And this was in a competitive JH game, so not sure why a Varsity team in a holiday showcase doesn't have a scorekeeper more on top of it.

Hope they don't confuse the official notifying them of the first horn with notifying them of TO's left.

I’d have to assume the official scorer gave the official bad info.

Whether the official relays the bad info (1 left), or doesn’t say a word—I’m not certain how that changes the results in this instance.

There are a couple of things here that caused this problem. First of all the visiting team scorer should be sitting next to the official scorer. And we have officials that absolutely feel the need to tell coaches of their timeout situation. I have in the past told coaches when told, but I do not feel it is an obligation or something I got out of my way to do. This is an example of why I think we sometimes need to allow the teams to take this role and figure out what they have or do not have.

Peace

You Don't Say ...
 

Up until today I've only heard "stories'" about this, now I have a real situation to point to.

Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game

"Coach, you have one timeout left", is a courtesy often extended by officials to coaches, when, by rule, officials should only be notifying head coaches when their team has been granted its final allowable timeout. If there is any miscommunication, or mistake, involving the table crew reporting remaining timeouts, then the officials, by rule, need to stay out of the conversation. Let the coaches, and table crew, communicate about remaining timeouts, other than when a team has been granted its final allowable timeout, which by rule, is required to be reported to the coach by the officials.

It doesn't change the result. It changes who is responsible for the error, taking the liability off of the referees.

Drives me nuts when officials tell a coach he has more than zero timeouts remaining. One time a partner (who was the R) told me to go tell the coach he had one left. I did not oblige.

Sometimes partners will tell me at the end of the game: "White has three timeouts left." Congratulations, I could not care less. I normally give a sarcastic thumbs up when this happens.

I don’t see the difference. Scenario 1, coach gripes to assignor, “Your official told us we had 1 timeout left when we didnt.” Scenario 2, “Your official, per rule, failed to inform us when we were out of timeouts.”

Official’s answer to both, “I was given bad info.”

The difference is the official broke into jail in Scenario 1 by trying to be a "good guy" doing something unnecessary.

Jesse, the difference is that BC is claiming that it was the referee's fault for telling the BC coach he had one TO left, not the table's or team's scorer's fault for misinforming the referee: "the referee came over to my huddle and told us we had 1 timeout remaining (which we have on video, and will be sending to the ref assigner for NCS)."

I wonder how the official determined there were no time outs left and issued the technical foul -- after (presumably) being told just a minute earlier the team had one. Did the home scorer deliberately lie? Did the official keep count on his own and just messed up?

I completely agree officials should only tell the coach when he is out of time outs, but clearly the official did not do that here. When we get bad information from the scorer and don't award merited free throws, we can correct the scorer's error if caught in time. But here -- the penalty for the scorer's error is particularly harsh.

Of course the team should keep its own book and know the time out situation -- but the same argument can be made about keeping track of team fouls. I would prefer the technical for calling too many time outs should apply only if the coach has been informed by the official that he has no time outs left.

Invariably during the 4th quarter this convo ensues:
Coach: "hay ref, how many time outs do I have left?"
Kansas ref: "coach please verify your timeout status with the score table". [I say this loud enough within earshot of the score table so they know what to expect]

Also this occurs at the beginning of a granted timeout as I am taking my wait position:
The guy or gal at the score table will demonstrably indicate to me with their hands..."3 time outs a full and a 30 on this side, 2 timeouts , 2 30's on this side". I know these score table personnel [who never wear the required striped shirts] are doing what they feel is their due diligence. But I always wait until their histrionic display is over, then I say "thanks score table, please let me know when there are zero timeouts left".

And invariably this also occurs, my partners who is well-meaning will say "2 timeouts left for red team, 1 for blue team...". To which I always say, "thanks, let me know when there are zero left".

Preference ...
 

I would also prefer this, but that's not the way the rule reads.

In the original scenario described by Nevada, the coach called the timeout between free throws by the opponent. In this scenario, I would agree that a technical might be harsh if there indeed was some misinformation spread around. In something like that, where the ball was dead, I would be in favor of immediately ending the timeout upon discovery that the coach had zero, not charging the tech, and play on. (I'm not saying I would do that, that's not the rule, but if a rule change were considered, that would make sense to me.) However, this cannot be a blanket statement the situation occurs. Consider this: Tie ball game, and a team misses a shot, rebounded by the defense with 3 seconds remaining, and the possessing team immediately calls for and is granted a timeout. In this situation, that team has gained a considerable advantage, and a play-on undoubtedly benefits that team. Without the ability to change the rule to a consistent, fair ruling, I would not be in favor of a rule change.

With all that in mind, if a coach requests a timeout during a dead ball, and you know he's out, do you double check with him? "You're out coach, are you sure?" or something similar to that? Live ball you don't really get that luxury, but during a dead ball, I don't see the harm in making sure he isn't making an absent-minded mistake.