Time Out

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Many times officials will rule in favor of the coach, saying the “request” was made when there was player control ... If the coach doesn’t understand by rule we must first be certain of the status of the ball (PC) before granting his time out request, that is his problem not ours. Locate the ball. Then make your decision. PC, yes? Whistle, grant time out. No PC? No whistle. No time out.

Agree with billyu2's well worded post, as do points of emphasis (with fuzzy wording similar to the actual fuzzy language of the actual rule) published over six different years.

However a twenty-three year old interpretation seems, at first glance, to disagree with both of us.

1998-99 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations: Situation 8: A1 is dribbling the ball in the frontcourt. The ball bounces off his leg into the backcourt. As A1 goes into backcourt to retrieve the ball, the head coach requests a time-out. Can the time-out request by the head coach be granted by the officials? Ruling: No. Team must be in player control when the verbal or visual request is made by the head coach and recognized by the official. (5-8-3a)

However, the phrase "and recognized by the official" can also be considered slightly fuzzy language.

Originally Posted by billyu2

The principle here is not any different than ruling on the release of a last-second shot. Would any official whistle the ball dead without accurate knowledge of the location of the ball? Locate the ball. Ball touching hand? Whistle, no shot. Ball in flight? No whistle.

Appreciate the effort from billyu2, but this is not an analogous situation. We can keep our "eye on the ball" 100% of the time while we listen for the horn at the same time. Also, there's no fuzzy language regarding a shot at the buzzer, it's pretty much straight forward.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree with billyu2's well worded post, as do points of emphasis (with fuzzy wording similar to the actual fuzzy language of the actual rule) published over six different years.

However a twenty-three year old interpretation seems, at first glance, to disagree with both of us.

1998-99 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations: Situation 8: A1 is dribbling the ball in the frontcourt. The ball bounces off his leg into the backcourt. As A1 goes into backcourt to retrieve the ball, the head coach requests a time-out. Can the time-out request by the head coach be granted by the officials? Ruling: No. Team must be in player control when the verbal or visual request is made by the head coach and recognized by the official. (5-8-3a)

However, the phrase "and recognized by the official" can also be considered slightly fuzzy language.



Appreciate the effort from billyu2, but this is not an analogous situation. We can keep our "eye on the ball" 100% of the time while we listen for the horn at the same time. Also, there's no fuzzy language regarding a shot at the buzzer, it's pretty much straight forward.

Actually, I never said the situations were comparable. I said it is the principle of being absolutely sure of the location of the ball that is imperative in both situations.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by billyu2

... being absolutely sure of the location of the ball that is imperative in both situations.

Agree.

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

White requested the TO when white had the ball, you acknowledged it when white had the ball, you blew the whistle. A little bit slow on the whistle doesn't change the fact that you heard it and decided to grant it when white had the ball. White timeout, white ball.

This.

It will require an emphatic call and bit of salesmanship, but if you KNOW white asked for the TO when white had the ball, you should grant the TO.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

... if you KNOW white asked for the TO when white had the ball, you should grant the TO.

Well stated, many may agree with you, it may be 100% NFHS correct, but it's still based on fuzzy rule language, no matter which side one takes.

[ilyazhito]

When in doubt, I default to not granting a timeout request. It's easier to explain that I was not sure whether the requesting team had control than to explain that "White had control at the time of the request, but lost it to Blue before I could blow my whistle." It takes time to confirm that there is a request, that the requester is valid (player or head coach of the requesting team), and that the team requesting the timeout has player control. By the time I confirm all those things, the situation could have changed, and the timeout request could no longer be legally granted.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

This.

It will require an emphatic call and bit of salesmanship, but if you KNOW white asked for the TO when white had the ball, you should grant the TO.

You would be better off if you KNOW white is asking for a TO and you see white HAS the ball, then grant the TO. No salesmanship required.

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by billyu2

You would be better off if you KNOW white is asking for a TO and you see white HAS the ball, then grant the TO. No salesmanship required.

If there is brief player control, and the opposing coach doesn't hear the request, you are going need to sell the call.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

If there is brief player control, and the opposing coach doesn't hear the request, you are going need to sell the call.

I’m not sure if anyone cares if the opposing coach hears the request or not but I guess if you feel you need to use some theatrics then go ahead.