When Officials Disagree
 

Been a while since I posted, but I do try to log in and read here and there.

Anyways, had a situation last week where we had officials disagree, and then couldn't come to a resolution. I wasn't on the game, but I run our association meetings, and I know this will be discussed, so I wanted to get some feedback as to how to proceed. Here's the scenario:

4th quarter of GV, fairly close game. A1 picks up her dribble in the backcourt near baseline, then pivots and steps OOB. Covering officials sees and calls the violation. At about the same time, the new lead comes in, saying the HC had called a timeout. They award the timeout, but during the timeout, the third official on the crew got them together, and said he had definite knowledge that the OOB whistle clearly came before the timeout. The crew then discusses what happened through the full timeout, and incredibly took another 4 minutes (which is an absolute eternity when players are on the court and ready to play) before finally going with the timeout.

So my question is, when you reach what seems to be an impasse, how do you move on? What phrases/techniques would you use within the conversation to move on? Because by rule one official cannot overrule another, I think the proper thing is to go with the original call. What makes this a little different, is the calling official had ceded his travel call, and it was the 3rd referee (who was actually correct btw) who didn't want to let it go. It's the 4th quarter in a close game, so this call matters, they just couldn't come to a decision, and hurt their own credibility by taking so long.

On a semi-related note, had an official a while back call a team control foul off-ball, but awarded 1-and-1 FT's. One of the officials came to him to say, wait a minute, this is team control, no FT's, but he was absolutely set that it was a "Common Foul," not player control, so it was different. Of course he was wrong, but he wasn't going to change his mind. The perfect solution is to know the rules, but if you were on that game, how do you get it right? Knowingly setting aside a rule would sit poorly with me, And I would struggle to let him live and die with the call when it's a not a judgement thing.

Any feedback on conversations for our meeting would be great, thanks!

That 3rd official needs to give his input immediately, before a decision is made. Once the decision is announced, it makes the crew look worse to change its mind UNLESS it involves the setting aside or misinterpretion of a rule.

As far as the original decision, and where the 3rd official comes into play, decide what happened first as a crew. That 3rd official is in the best position to establish the order of events.

Eventually, someone needs to step up and say "I'll take responsibility for this" and then live with the consequences.

No official rule to let the R decide (as there is in baseball)

Situation 1 = the crew must determine which came first between the granting of the time-out or the committing of the out of bounds violation. By rule the granting of the TO comes when the official signals, which is the raising of a hand and the sounding of the whistle. Rule references are 5-8 and 2-12-6. The violation occurs and the ball becomes dead when the player touches out of bounds, the whistle is merely an indicator to everyone, including the timer, that the official has recognized the violation. Therefore, the timing of the whistles is actually not the determining factor. If we adhere strictly to the rules, the only the covering official would have knowledge as to whether to player stepped out prior to a partner sounding the whistle for a time-out. In the situation presented, it seems that the out of bounds preceded the granting of the time-out.

That said, I have a good friend who is a former D1 official and he has counseled me to bend the rules a bit in such situations and go with the time-out request whenever it is close in the spirit of game management because all coaches understand that they can save a possession if they are willing to burn a time-out. Even the opposing coach is usually okay with this as long as the same is done when his team is in trouble and he makes a request.

Situation 2: Whenever the facts of the action are not in dispute, but it is merely a question of what is the proper rule or application of a rule, the crew should conference with the R on the game being consulted and allowed to make the final ruling. He also has to take the responsibility should he screw it up.

There is no clear rule reference for this because what is written in the book is crafted with the understanding that all officials will always have correct knowledge of the rules. If one does not, it can only be inferred that someone else needs to step in and provide the correct information and then allow the R to make the final decision based upon his other listed authorities for when officials disagree.

If I am the Referee, this is probably the time I will step in. I would not want to try to make a decision that is going to feel like I undermined an official, but part of your job there is to take control of things that could happen incorrectly. I would be adamant if an official is about to misapply a rule if they clearly did not know that rule. I have been in this situation in college where if I would have allowed my partner's to go the way they wanted to (and I did not make the call), we could have gotten suspended or fined. It is not something I ever want to do and the Referee usually has some unwritten authority here, I would have never let that just happen. Judgment ruling that I did not see, is one thing. But a rules mistake would not go over well.

In this case just see what happened first. And if the calling official insists that the timeout took first, what can you do? This is not a rules situation like the TC situation described.

Peace