So let's assume we have a situation where the game is tied the 4th quarter ends and then a team receives a technical foul BEFORE the timer starts the one minute intermission. If the officials incorrectly administer the FTs before this intermission period takes place, should they be considered part of the 4th quarter or part of the OT? I think that if you took two attorneys and put them in front of a judge to argue what the Rules Book says about this, that the ruling would come down--the officials screwed up and the FTs now have to be considered part of the 4th quarter, so if either one of them is successful the game is over.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Did the technical foul above occur <b>AFTER</b> the fourth quarter <b>ENDED</b>? Yes, it sureashell did! You stated that was so above. When the 4th quarter ended, the ball automatically became dead because there wasn't any "related activity" involved. Case book play 5.6CommentB says <i>"If a technical foul occurs after the ball has become dead to end a quarter, the next quarter is started by administering the free throws...It also applies when the foul occurs after the second half has ended,provided the score is tied"</i>. That language fits your situation completely. Conversely, there is <b>NO</b> language anywhere in the rules that will support your position.

The judge's ruling is that you and your two lawyers are full of sh*t! :D

Nevada, the officials made an error of timimg by shooting the FT's at the start, instead of at the end, of an intermission. That was an official's error, NOT a correctible error. To give out an AP now would be simply making another official's error, but one that can also be corrected, if need be. I've given you the same response umpteen times on this play. I haven't seen anything quoted from the rules that would change my mind. Obviously, we don't agree on this play. Why don't we leave it that way.

[/B][/QUOTE]

I guess we will stay on opposing sides of this. Not a total loss, we do agree on the rule and the proper way to handle the play, what we don't agree upon is how to proceed once it has been screwed up. I do not believe that 5-6-4 or the Case Book play you quoted instructs us as what to do after the free throws have been shot at the wrong time. They both only tell us how it should be done if nothing gets screwed up. In the absence of a clear proceedure such as is outlined in 2-10 for fixing a correctable error or a Case Book play similar to 8.7 Sit B, which tells us how to treat these mistimed FTs, it will have to continue to be a difference of opinion.

I would like to point out though, that despite my asking a couple of times, you never did explicitly come out and say that you consider those mistimed FTs to have been attempted in the 3rd quarter. You only state over and over that they were attempted after the 2nd quarter ended. I guess I'll just have to interpret what you think from that. :)

[Edited by Nevadaref on Mar 17th, 2004 at 07:10 AM]

I would like to point out though, that despite my asking a couple of times, you never did explicitly come out and say that you consider those mistimed FTs to have been attempted in the 3rd quarter. You only state over and over that they were attempted after the 2nd quarter ended. I guess I'll just have to interpret what you think from that.

[/B][/QUOTE]No need to interpret. The FT's were attempted as part of the 3rd quarter. They were part of the 3rd quarter no matter when they were shot- as long as the second quarter was over. Which it was. The timing of the FT's- before, during or after the intermission- doesn't really change that conclusion. Again, there's no rules language available that would allow for any other conclusion than that.

Me thinks you are arguing about the wrong thing.

The FTs were after the second quarter. So, the teams should have changed ends.

My guess is that the FTs were shot in the wrong basket (iow, the same direction the teams were goping in the first half), so thiw *was* a correctable error.

Ahhhhh, very good Bob...so, the officials got it right (accidently?) in the original situation by re-shooting the FT's! :)

Now a guess turns into a fact? Great trick, guys. We were arguing a specific scenario. Not a completely different one. I also agree that it is a correctible error if they shot them at the wrong end, but we don't know if they did shoot them at the wrong end, and that was never part of this discussion anyway.

Still doesn't change the fact, Nevada, that the possession to start the 3rd quarter is still not an AP, but the possession part of the T penalty.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Mar 17th, 2004 at 08:32 AM]

Jurassic -- you are entirely wrong about counting FT's depending on when they are shot! When the horn sounds to end the quarter (and there are no lingering/outstanding penalties to be administered), the QUARTER IS OVER! Any subsequent action is considered to be a part of the next period/quarter. When the FT's are shot, either before or after the haltime/quarter intermission does not dictate how you count the points. Either it happens before the quarter is over OR it happens after the quarter is over. There is no middle ground - the clock running or not running in between quarters doesn't make a difference one way or the other.

Are you saying that after the 4th quarter horn sounds in a tie-game and you slap a T on someone, that becuase the FT's are mistakenly administered prior to the clock operator beginning the 60-second time-frame, a team will lose because the made FT's have to count in the 4th quarter? Game Over? Not a chance.............

In my previous post, OF COURSE the score dictates wether FT's should be administered at the end of the 4th quarter - I assumed that everyone here would know that (maybe I shouldn't assume based on previous posts).

3rd -- once the 2nd quarter ends, it is in the past, and you can't go back into it. Whenever I'm working clock, I always switch the half (quarter) before I even start the halftime countdown.

Apples - halftime
Oranges - end of game.

While the officials often check the book and confer with the scorers' table during halftime, they do not "approve" the halftime score. (To do so would actually go against the rule - what if, late in the 4th, it is discovered that a signaled three was only recorded as 2 in the first quarter? That was approved, so can it be fixed?)

Re: I wouldn't mind seeing a Case Book play on this
 

A hypothetical, then.

2nd quarter clearly ends. Officials come back out for halftime warmups at 3 minutes, and with 2 minutes on the clock, A's coach starts throwing chairs and a T is assessed.

We all agree that we start the 3rd (2nd half) with the free throws. If, however, you argue that no part of a penalty carries over, then the T truly was given in some form of a twilight zone, and we can't shoot the free throws.

I really can't see why the argument is so long. The T happened after the 2nd quarter ended. We are now in the third period...5-6-1 thru 4 make this pretty clear. I do like Bob's point that brings the correctable error part into it. They most likely shot the throws at the wrong basket, however it doesn't change the fact that we don't go to the arrow for the throw in... The 4th quarter argument is even clarified and is a special exception to what would otherwise signal the end of the quarter...I guess it is similar to court location. You are where you were until you get to where your going....We are in the 2nd until it ends then we are in the 3rd :D

(1)Uh no, Jeff, the quarter is NOT over in all cases. I am saying that your all-inclusive statement above is wrong in one specific case. If the fourth quarter ends( as per the horn and with no lingering/outstanding penalties to be administered), and you THEN issue a T-- in this case, unless the score is tied, you would (a) not shoot the FT's if they didn't make a difference in the outcome of the game, or (b) shoot the FT's as PART OF THE FOURTH QUARTER. Case (b) is what makes your statement wrong. The subsequent action( FT's for the T) is NOT part of the next quarter. It becomes part of the fourth quarter. That's exactly what casebook play 5.6CommentB states. In (b), you also start the OT period with a jump ball, NOT a possession as part of the T penalty.

2)As to #2, no, I am not saying that. That is what Nevada is implying should be done, and that's what I've been arguing against. Casebook play 5.6CommentB again contradicts his stand. Does that clear that one up?

p/foul vs tech foul
 

This line of questioning has been great...learning alot listening to all the different opinions and interpetations...still have to go back and look for myself...I have noticed something else, the rule book 5-6-4 deals with techs and the case book 5.6.b says the score MUST be TIED to shoot the f/t's to determine IF there is going to be any extra periods, so if the offended team is only down by 1 the game is still over...right? Next...rule 5-6-3 exception p/foul would be administered at the end of 4th qtr. if team was down by 1 or 2 pts. right? If what I have described is true does there seem to be a difference between a p/foul vs tech foul and why? Thanks again guys!

Re: p/foul vs tech foul
 

First explain how a personal foul could occur after the 4th quarter has ended? I think it would have to be a T.
Secondly, what you wrote above is not the case. The rules says to attempt the free throws immediately and consider them part of the preceeding quarter if they could affect the outcome of the game, unless the game is tied. That covers your senario about a team being down by 1 or 2. If they are down 3 or more the game is over and the free throws are not attempted. If the game is tied the FTs are shot to begin the next period. AND SHOULD BE SHOT AFTER THE INTERMISSION!!!!! :)

2nd or 3rd quarter?
 

Bob, this is EXCELLENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If they shoot BEFORE THE INTERMISSION and at the basket which the team was shooting during the 1st and 2nd quarters, it certainly looks like those FTs should be considered part of the first half/2nd quarter. I never even thought about the wrong basket aspect of this. What an astute observation!

JR, that is your opinion and I respect it, but I disagree with it. I believe that the timing of the FTs before the intermission does create a problem. Here's the rule language available that would allow for a conclusion other than yours: 5-5-1 "...Playing time for teams of high school age shall be four quarters of eight minutes each with intermissions of one minute after the first and third quarters, and 10 minutes between halves. ..."
Since the intermission is required BY RULE to take place BETWEEN HALVES, you cannot consider any FTs attempted prior to the intermission to be part of the 3rd quarter. Doing so would mean that the 10 minute intermission would take place DURING THE 3RD QUARTER. That goes against rule 5-5-1. It is absurd to say that we are going to start a quarter with some FTs, take a 10 minute break, and then come back and finish the quarter. Therefore, I believe that my reasoning to consider the mistimed FTs to be part of the 2nd quarter, especially if they were attempted at the same basket with no change of ends, and chalk it up as an officials mistake, makes the most sense. We know that the shouldn't have done it this way, but they did, and now we are stuck with it.