Timeout Requested, Time Out Granted ???

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Must the player control be when the timeout is requested, or when the timeout is granted?

Both, in NCAAW.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Both, in NCAAW.

NCAAW: Both? So if one is missing, let's say the player doesn't have control when the timeout is to be granted, then the time out cannot be granted?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NCAAW: Both? So if one is missing, let's say the player doesn't have control when the timeout is to be granted, then the time out cannot be granted?

I would have thought "both" was self-explanatory.

Here's a play:
Question:

During Team A's throw-in, Team A's head coach requests time out. A1 releases the throw-in pass. As the pass is in the air, the center official grants Team A's timeout request.

Does the rule support granting the timeout because the request was made when player control existed (allowing for reaction time) or is this an inadvertent whistle?

Answer:

There is no such thing as “reaction time” and this whistle was an inadvertent whistle because the timeout was granted while there was no player control. During the dead ball caused by the inadvertent whistle, if either team wishes a time out, it may be granted. If there is less than one minute remaining in the game, Team A would be able to advance the ball.

A timeout is granted when the official signals to stop play, not when it is requested.

A.R. 170 is on point.

And, the referenced AR:

A.R. 170. With less than one minute remaining in the fourth quarter, B1
scores. Team A’s head coach requests a timeout; however, when the official
grants the timeout, A1’s throw-in pass has been released but the throw-in has
not ended.
RULING: This is an inadvertent whistle and play shall resume at
the point of interruption. Because the throw-in had not ended, play
resumes with the re-administration of the throw-in. The official is
permitted to inquire as to whether Team A still wants the timeout,
noting that the option to advance the ball to the 28-foot throwin
mark in the frontcourt on either side of the playing court is
available.
(Rules 5-14.2 and 7-5.1.b)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... this whistle was an inadvertent whistle because the timeout was granted while there was no player control.

Thanks.

Is this also true for NFHS? I believe (opinion) that it is the same. Control equals grant.

The situation I was thinking of was more open ended, there was no inadvertent whistle.

The official was undecided as to whether it was too late to grant the timeout because the Red player and the White player both had joint control of the ball (held ball) at the time the official considered granting the timeout request, said request being made when only the Red player had control of the ball.

What should the official have decided? I say don't grant. Call the held ball.

[Camron Rust]

If a player steps OOB and, before you blow the whistle, then gets fouled by B1. Do you forget the OOB violation and call the foul on B1 or do do you call the OOB violation and ignore the foul?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If a player steps OOB and, before you blow the whistle, then gets fouled by B1. Do you forget the OOB violation and call the foul on B1 or do do you call the OOB violation and ignore the foul?

Not sure what the point is, but I'm calling the out of bounds and then charging the foul, but only if it's intentional or flagrant, otherwise, if not intentional or flagrant, I'm ignoring the foul.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree that the actual whistle has little to do with it.

Basketball Rules Fundamentals #16: The official’s whistle seldom causes the ball to become dead (it is already dead).

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

A live ball must be in player control (or at a team's disposal for a FT or throwin) for the team to be granted a timeout.

[BillyMac]

2021-22 NFHS Basketball Points Of Emphasis

Time-Out Administration

During a “dead” ball, either team may be granted a time out. During a live ball, only the team in control of the ball may be granted a timeout. It is important officials verify there is player control prior to granting the request.

Head Coach requesting: Coaches must understand that just because they have requested a timeout does not guarantee it will be granted. Remember, only the head coach or a player of the team in control of the ball may legally request a timeout. Officials must be sure the head coach is making the request. This request may be oral or visual.

Player control. The committee is still concerned that officials are granting timeouts while the ball is loose and not in player control. Over the years, an officiating philosophy has developed that teaches officials to grant loose ball timeouts quickly to avoid rough play and stop additional players from diving onto the loose ball pile. While preventing rough play is desirable, that concept cannot supersede the basic rule that a player must be in control of the ball for a timeout to be legally granted. When in doubt, do not grant the timeout. Additionally, do not hesitate to charge fouls for players “jumping on” another player. “Going for the ball” does not justify this rough play.

Granting Timeout Requests: Ideally, granting the timeout should be the primary coverage official. However, other official(s) may become aware that a timeout is being requested. In all cases, officials must be certain there is player control prior to granting the timeout request. Officials should also be aware of situations where timeouts are more likely to be requested e.g. end of the period/ game or a team has made several baskets in a row.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Not sure what the point is, but I'm calling the out of bounds and then charging the foul, but only if it's intentional or flagrant, otherwise, if not intentional or flagrant, I'm ignoring the foul.

You just added stuff to the play that was stated by Cameron. All that he was saying, if you have an event and the moment you happen to blow your whistle the ball is not in player control anymore or in the case of his example, clearly, the violation took place first, you call what happened first. It might look a mess and you might have to explain, but the action that took place first is what you can go with.

This should not be hard to know after all these years. Now should be take our time and be sure that player-control has taken place when we blow our whistle? Yes.

Peace