Well, the errors in this situation are misapplication of the rules directly by the officials. That isn't the kind of situation I've ever referred to.

My prior point on having the rules such that it motivates a team to point out the error are based on a scorekeeping error providing the officials with an incorrect foul count.

When the officials simply screw it up, not much can be said about that.

Yep, on a rule issue you are up a creek. Especially in a no-protest state as Ohio is. Hopefully we never get to the point where we have to rule books in our pocket or at the table like football or baseball and softball had gotten to. Though I'm sure we've all had cases where we'd love to show coaches the rule book.

Correctable Errors ...
 

I'm having trouble following some of the debate in this thread, but I will say this about correctable errors. Forty years ago, when I was taking classes preparing for the written rules exam, we were told to know the correctable error rule up, down, backward, forward, and sideways; that it would definitely be on the exam, and would probably be one of the most difficult questions on the exam.

Is it a perfect rule? Is it easy to follow? Should the list of correctable errors be expanded, or more limited? Should the time window be expanded, or more limited? Should the time limit be easier to understand, especially in regard to change of possession? How about do-overs? Should correctable errors be more like "bookkeeping errors" with the ability to be corrected at any time (with definite knowledge) in the officials' jurisdiction? Can there be too many correctable errors?

And most importantly, is it fair?

Bottom line, the correctable error rule, warts and all, has been around for a long time, and in my forty years there has been no major change in the rule.

Some might not think so, but it appears that the NFHS likes the rule, or at least tolerates it, as it is presently written.

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.C...=0&w=300&h=300

I do not think extending the time limit is practical as scorers will have to keep more detailed records and officials would have to have better memories.

As an official turned into a coach (the dark side had cookies), all I can do is ask/question what is going on. I have had situations free throws were going to be awarded on a TC foul, or not awarded when it was not a TC foul. All I can do is get the attention of the nearest official and ask the "right" question - "Hey Bill! Wasn't that a Team Control foul? Should they be shooting?" At that point its in their control...I would like to say that on the few occasions where they have continued on and shot/not shot, I have made no snotty comments...I would like to say that, but not sure I can truthfully say that.

Do You Remember (September, Earth, Wind, And Fire, 1978)...
 

Playing Devil's advocate, the time limit is fully extended (corrected at any time in the officials' jurisdiction) for "bookkeeping errors".

Visiting score keeper at the end of an apparent one point loss before the officials leave the court:"Hey. There was only one successful three pointer in the entire game, by the visiting team, back in the first period, both of you signaled the three, but the home scorekeeper only marked it as two points. Remember?".

Thats why we have the books checked at halftime before going into the locker room and in the last minutes/seconds of the fourth if the game is close. If it would happen, all the parent scorekeepers in the crowd would of been having conniption fits two seconds after the goal was miscredited.

This. It’s why I never really worry about bookkeeping errors that involve the score. Help is all around me. Fouls? Not so much. Gotta pay close attention to the team foul count, and sometimes team member foul counts, too (the home scorer can be sneaky at times). But the score? Nope.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have had a game where the visible scoreboard indicated a tie after 4 quarters. About 30 seconds into OT, the table buzzed and the scorer indicated the game hadn't actually been tied.

Yes, we adjudicated it correctly.

A Truly Rare Bird ...
 

I wonder how many officials have had such a situation and ruled correctly?

5-7-4: Once the ball becomes live in the extra period, it will be
played even though a correction in the fourth quarter score is made.

5.7.4 SITUATION: The score is tied at the end of regulation time. During the overtime period, the official scorer informs the referee that Team A had an additional point in the fourth quarter that was not counted. In (a), the referee reviews the scorebook and recognizes where a point was not properly credited to Team A; or (b) the referee does not have definite knowledge that a point was not credited to Team A. RULING: In (a), the referee adds a point to Team A's score. In (b), the referee does not add a point to Team A's score. In either case, the referee continues the overtime period to completion. (2-11-11)

Not in central Ohio. We give the player control signal on all offensive fouls. It's used as a way to communicate that they're are no free throws.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

The Buckeye State ...
 

Man, you Ohio guys are really serious about your signals.

Still waiting for Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. to chime in. I bet he can't wait to yank my chain.

We're the best! Lol

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

In Oregon, we authorize the team control signal for pc fouls.

At one time, there was a reason to have different signals. Now, they are treated exactly the same so there is no good reason to have two signals. The only difference is that one is committed by the player with the ball and that difference is entirely irrelevant.

We chose the TC signal because it is a much better signal in almost every way.

Lack Of Consistency ...
 

We have about 325 guys on our local board and also have about 325 different player control foul signals.