The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 11:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Re: Re: I disagree Nevada

Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
Nevada,
I disagree, this is not a record keeping error. A record keeping error would be the scorer writing down the wrong number or not recording a three or something of that nature. With that said I still say this is one of the things that you should try to correct, just cause it is the right thing. However if much more time elapses than the original post indicates, it is too late in my mind to do much about it... I am surprised however that the coach didn't mention this situation on the original foul....
Nevada was completely correct. Rule 2-11-11 is explicit in backing him up. Note:
(1) "Compare records with the visiting scorer after each goal, each foul, .....notifying the referee at once of any discrepancy".
(2) "A bookkeeping mistake may be corrected at any time until the referee approves the final score".

It is not a correctible error under R2-10. It is an error that may be corrected at any time until the game ends. Rule book sez so.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 5th, 2005 at 11:26 AM]
IMO he's both right & wrong.

He's right because yes, a *record keeping* error can be corrected at any time.

He's wrong because the way I read it he implies the rules allow & even *encourage* us to let the coach (or whoever)have input on who the foul was on.

In the sitch the foul was reported on #35. When the scorer checks off another foul on #35 that is *not* a record keeping error. If you're *sure* the foul is on #35 there is no support in the book for you to change it based on anything anyone else tells you. If, when questioned, you realize the foul isn't on #35 then yes, fix it. If you have some doubt then sure, go to your partner for help (geeze, don't ask the players fergawdsake). If you have the foul on #35 then it stands, period.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 11:54am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Re: Re: Re: I disagree Nevada

Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
Nevada,
I disagree, this is not a record keeping error. A record keeping error would be the scorer writing down the wrong number or not recording a three or something of that nature. With that said I still say this is one of the things that you should try to correct, just cause it is the right thing. However if much more time elapses than the original post indicates, it is too late in my mind to do much about it... I am surprised however that the coach didn't mention this situation on the original foul....
Nevada was completely correct. Rule 2-11-11 is explicit in backing him up. Note:
(1) "Compare records with the visiting scorer after each goal, each foul, .....notifying the referee at once of any discrepancy".
(2) "A bookkeeping mistake may be corrected at any time until the referee approves the final score".

It is not a correctible error under R2-10. It is an error that may be corrected at any time until the game ends. Rule book sez so.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 5th, 2005 at 11:26 AM]
IMO he's both right & wrong.

He's right because yes, a *record keeping* error can be corrected at any time.

He's wrong because the way I read it he implies the rules allow & even *encourage* us to let the coach (or whoever)have input on who the foul was on.

In the sitch the foul was reported on #35. When the scorer checks off another foul on #35 that is *not* a record keeping error. If you're *sure* the foul is on #35 there is no support in the book for you to change it based on anything anyone else tells you. If, when questioned, you realize the foul isn't on #35 then yes, fix it. If you have some doubt then sure, go to your partner for help (geeze, don't ask the players fergawdsake). If you have the foul on #35 then it stands, period.
Gotta agree with that. That's exactly what I was trying to (maybe clumsily) get across. If the officials are sure that a mistake on a foul # was made, it can be corrected at any time until the game ends. If the officials aren't completely sure, or they can't agree amongst themselves- iow any doubt at all- then you can't change it. The coach may ask you to check however. Might cost him a TO to do so though. They never do get a vote.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 12:16pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Re: Re: I disagree Nevada

Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
Nevada,
I disagree, this is not a record keeping error. A record keeping error would be the scorer writing down the wrong number or not recording a three or something of that nature. With that said I still say this is one of the things that you should try to correct, just cause it is the right thing. However if much more time elapses than the original post indicates, it is too late in my mind to do much about it... I am surprised however that the coach didn't mention this situation on the original foul....
Nevada was completely correct. Rule 2-11-11 is explicit in backing him up. Note:
(1) "Compare records with the visiting scorer after each goal, each foul, .....notifying the referee at once of any discrepancy".
(2) "A bookkeeping mistake may be corrected at any time until the referee approves the final score".

It is not a correctible error under R2-10. It is an error that may be corrected at any time until the game ends. Rule book sez so.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 5th, 2005 at 11:26 AM]
These are bookkeeping mistakes, not officials' errors. The case here involves the official reporting the wrong player. This is like the official signaling three-pt basket incorrectly. It's a correctable error, but only for a short time. If, however, the official signals correctly but the scorer records it incorrectly; that can be corrected as long as the referee hasn't approved the final score.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 12:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
how is it a bookkeeping error??

Snaqwells,
How is this a bookkeeping error? If the official eroneously reports the wrong number that is not a bookkeeping error...so none of this fits under bookkeeping at least in my humble opinion..
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 01:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 406
When the ref reported #35, why didn't the table crew and the coach (and the player for that matter) question it right away? If #35 was nowhere near the play, it would be appropriate to ask, do you mean #35 or #15? The ref can do a quick review (maybe ask partner if necessary) and get the number correct right away. Asking players is not a good idea.

I suppose in the play in question, since it happened right away, the referees could consult and decide if the last foul was on #35 or #15. If there is not DEFINITE knowledge it was reported wrong, then it should be left alone.

In general,Once in the books and play has continued, seems it is too late to change your mind. Thisis is not a correctable error, nor a bookkeeping error. There is no description of "fixing" this type of mistake in a certain amount of time. What if it happened in the first quarter, then #35 gets into foul trouble with two minutes remaining. Coach says, HEY, wasn't that early foul actually on #15, not #35? The referee is supposed to remember this, and change it???
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 02:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Send a message via AIM to Back In The Saddle Send a message via MSN to Back In The Saddle Send a message via Yahoo to Back In The Saddle
Garbage in = Garbage out

It sounds as if there is a general opinion that the only thing that constitutes a bookeeping error is when the guy running the pencil writes the wrong thing. I disagree.

The book is written record of the relevant events of the game (points, fouls, etc.). The entire crew is responsible for keeping it correctly. The officials are responsible for gathering and communicating the information. The scorekeepers are responsible for recording it. A breakdown in any part of that system may result in a bookeeping error.

In this situation, there was neither an error in judgement nor a misapplied rule. Those would be mistakes by the official. There was a mistake in recording who commited the foul. That is a bookeeping error.

It mattereth not whether the scorekeeper mis-recorded correct information or correctly recorded mis-information. It's still a bookeeping error. Fix it if you are able to.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 03:44pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Re: Garbage in = Garbage out

Quote:
Originally posted by Back In The Saddle

In this situation, there was neither an error in judgement nor a misapplied rule. Those would be mistakes by the official. There was a mistake in recording who commited the foul. That is a bookeeping error.

It mattereth not whether the scorekeeper mis-recorded correct information or correctly recorded mis-information. It's still a bookeeping error. Fix it if you are able to.
Which is exactly what Rule 2-11-11 states that you can legally do. That rule specifically refers to a discrepancy regarding fouls, refers to it as a "bookkeeping mistake", and also very specifically states that this discrepancy concerning fouls can be corrected at any time up to the end of the game.

For all those saying anything different, can you cite a rule- any rule- that would contradict this rule and back up your position?
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 03:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
Bookkeeping

JR, the position that it is an officials error is just as justifiable as the stance that it is a bookkeeping error. No one disputes that bookkeeping errors can be resolved at any time. The dispute arises as to whether this is a bookkeeping dispute or an officials error. If you look up bookkeeper in the dictionary, it says "one who records the accounts or transactions of a business". It doesn't mention them being one who reports (ie the R or U in our scenario)...so I am going with this not being a "bookkeeping" error but an officials error.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 04:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,277
My .02

Unless you and your partner know for sure thst you reported the foul on the wrong player you better live with it.

1) If I were the opposing coach I would be upset if another coach says "wait a minute he doesnt have 5 fouls" and you change it.

2) Where is the coach and his game management skills. Doesn't he know when a player has 4 fouls- Shame on Him!

3) Most score keeper signal the bench when players have fouls that are getting close (many scoreboards have it too)

4) The officials should know this too. A good official knows when players are getting close and can tell player to be careful, or not give them the 5th foul on a cheap foul.


Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 04:29pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Re: Bookkeeping

Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
JR, the position that it is an officials error is just as justifiable as the stance that it is a bookkeeping error. No one disputes that bookkeeping errors can be resolved at any time. The dispute arises as to whether this is a bookkeeping dispute or an officials error. If you look up bookkeeper in the dictionary, it says "one who records the accounts or transactions of a business". It doesn't mention them being one who reports (ie the R or U in our scenario)...so I am going with this not being a "bookkeeping" error but an officials error.
How can you argue against a rule? That's what I'm finding hard to understand.

Rule 2-11-11 specifically refers to "fouls". It says that if there is a discrepancy concerning "fouls", then it's a bookkeeping mistake (actual terminology used right outa the rule) and it can be corrected until the referee approves the final score. That's not my "position". That's what that NFHS rule states. If you can cite anything different from the NFHS rule or case books that would negate that rule, I'm certainly open to have my mind changed. I'm just not aware of anything anywhere that says that this rule isn't applicable.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 04:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
the discrepency is in the recording not the reporting

JR, as was mentioned above, the discrepency would be if the official reported number 25 and it was recorded to number 35. That is a bookkeeping error.

If the official reports # 35 and the bookkeeper correctly records it, then it isn't a bookkeeping error. Now if the official goes back in time and says "oh man, that foul should have been on # 15" it still isn't a bookkeeping mistake, it is an officials error.

Now since you are stuck on this rule, 2-11-11, according to the first sentence the bookkeeper must notify the referee. So even if we take this situation and try and make it a bookkeeping error, the only way it could fit into 2-11-11 is if the bookkeeper says, "um hey mr Referee, I think the foul was on #25".

Now that last paragraph is ridiculous and I know it, but I am trying to point out that just because the word foul appears in that rule does not mean that all things to do with fouls are bookkeeping related.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 07:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Send a message via AIM to Back In The Saddle Send a message via MSN to Back In The Saddle Send a message via Yahoo to Back In The Saddle
Re: the discrepency is in the recording not the reporting

Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
JR, as was mentioned above, the discrepency would be if the official reported number 25 and it was recorded to number 35. That is a bookkeeping error.

If the official reports # 35 and the bookkeeper correctly records it, then it isn't a bookkeeping error. Now if the official goes back in time and says "oh man, that foul should have been on # 15" it still isn't a bookkeeping mistake, it is an officials error.

Now since you are stuck on this rule, 2-11-11, according to the first sentence the bookkeeper must notify the referee. So even if we take this situation and try and make it a bookkeeping error, the only way it could fit into 2-11-11 is if the bookkeeper says, "um hey mr Referee, I think the foul was on #25".

Now that last paragraph is ridiculous and I know it, but I am trying to point out that just because the word foul appears in that rule does not mean that all things to do with fouls are bookkeeping related.
#15 commits a foul. The official calls the foul. For whatever reason the official reports #35. The error is in the reporting, that is a bookkeeping function. Please note that the rule talks about a bookkeeping error, not a bookkeeper error. Bookkeeping is the process, not the person. If the official is certain that he reported it incorrectly, it can be changed at any time before the final score is approved.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 08:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
BITS I disagree

If you look above at the definition of bookkeeping, it is not the reporting. You have a good point, but I don't think that it is valid. I think that the rule is there to correct an error by the bookkeeper in recording things. The rule also refers to comparing the books to find the discrepency. If the books both record #35 then there is no way to discover the discrepency. I am not advocating not changing anything, I am advocating that we be sure we don't use 2-11-11 as the reason as, it isn't bookkeeping that is wrong but the reporting. Technically you can't correct it.

If you look at the case book, all of the cases in 2.11.10 discuss the official properly reporting/awarding the information and it is just recoreded incorrectly. These are all corrected under the bookkeeping error provision.

If you report a foul incorrectly, in my mind that is an inadvertant setting aside of a rule specifically 2-7-5 and 2-9-1

case book 2.10.1 is the closest I can find to this situation. If you read it, in situation A where the official fails to signal, and the scorer records 2 pts, it is listed as a correctable error if discovered within the proper time frame, not a bookkeeping error. In situation B where the off official signals the 3 but it is recorded as a 2, that is listed as a bookkeeping error. So the two (reporting, recording) are seperate acts, not one process. If they were one process then A would be correctable at anytime, but because the official fails to signal correctly (just like signalling a wrong number)it is an officials error, not bookkeeping...
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 08:25pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Re: BITS I disagree

Quote:
Originally posted by cmathews
If you look above at the definition of bookkeeping, it is not the reporting. You have a good point, but I don't think that it is valid. I think that the rule is there to correct an error by the bookkeeper in recording things. The rule also refers to comparing the books to find the discrepency. If the books both record #35 then there is no way to discover the discrepency. I am not advocating not changing anything, I am advocating that we be sure we don't use 2-11-11 as the reason as, it isn't bookkeeping that is wrong but the reporting. Technically you can't correct it.

If you look at the case book, all of the cases in 2.11.10 discuss the official properly reporting/awarding the information and it is just recoreded incorrectly. These are all corrected under the bookkeeping error provision.

If you report a foul incorrectly, in my mind that is an inadvertant setting aside of a rule specifically 2-7-5 and 2-9-1

case book 2.10.1 is the closest I can find to this situation. If you read it, in situation A where the official fails to signal, and the scorer records 2 pts, it is listed as a correctable error if discovered within the proper time frame, not a bookkeeping error. In situation B where the off official signals the 3 but it is recorded as a 2, that is listed as a bookkeeping error. So the two (reporting, recording) are seperate acts, not one process. If they were one process then A would be correctable at anytime, but because the official fails to signal correctly (just like signalling a wrong number)it is an officials error, not bookkeeping...
The bottom line is that you still haven't cited a rule or a case book play that would negate the very specific language of Rule 2-11-11. Nothing that you've cited above does. Case book play 2.10.1 isn't applicable, and neither are any of the rules that you cited. I think that you should take this one to your local assignor/evaluator/rules guru and get their opinion on it- in case it ever does come up in a game that you're doing. Might be a good idea imo.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 05, 2005, 08:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
JR I still disagree

JR,
Is it your feeling that reporting of the foul and recording of the foul are one and the same?

If it is then we will never agree, and I believe that case 2.10.1.f.A specifically points out that there is a difference between the two.

If you don't believe that they are one and the same, then if the scorer correctly records it, it isn't a bookkeeping error but an officials error, which technically isn't one of the correctable errors.

[Edited by cmathews on Jan 5th, 2005 at 08:42 PM]
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:00pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1