Since it's a topic this year....

[rainmaker]

...I'll ask a question about the women's final last night. What did anyone think about Melissa Barlow's whistle to stop play and talk to the Baylor coach? The announcers said it was to inquire about a 2 or a 3, but I have a hard time swallowing that. I haven't seen the entire game yet, since I don't have cable and my friend taped it for me, did they give a better explanation later?

[Lotto]

I'm pretty sure that that was the reason why play was stopped. After the shot, the Baylor coach was shown gesticulating wildly with three fingers in the air. She then went up and was talking to Melissa Barlow, who then blew her whistle and conferred. Play was then resumed from PoI.

If that's what was going on, then this is not the way things should have been handled, however. The Baylor coach should have informed the table about her question. At the next dead ball, the table should blow the horn and inform the officials of the coach's request. If there turns out to be no error (as in this case), then Baylor would be charged a timeout. If there is an error, then no timeout is charged.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Lotto
I'm pretty sure that that was the reason why play was stopped. After the shot, the Baylor coach was shown gesticulating wildly with three fingers in the air. She then went up and was talking to Melissa Barlow, who then blew her whistle and conferred. Play was then resumed from PoI.

If that's what was going on, then this is not the way things should have been handled, however. The Baylor coach should have informed the table about her question. At the next dead ball, the table should blow the horn and inform the officials of the coach's request. If there turns out to be no error (as in this case), then Baylor would be charged a timeout. If there is an error, then no timeout is charged.

Did the refs signal a 3? If not, I don't think this is fixable. A scoretable error is, (I mean, if they wrote in 2 instead of 3), but not under 2-10. Is the correctable error rule different in college than hs? In high school, this isn't a correctable error. The coach can't go to the table for this, and there's no "charged or not-charged a time-out". But it is fixable up to the time the book is signed off, and the refs are off the court. ... if the refs had signalled a 3. If they thought it was a 2, then it's just too bad for that team.

It would definitely be wrong in hs to stop play, especially when the opponent has the ball! I guess even the best refs (and Melissa Barlow is definitely one of the best!!) can make mistakes once in a while.

[Lotto]

I think it does fall under 2.10e, erroneously counting or canceling a score, at least in NCAA. There's some evidence for this in the rulebook:

Appendix III, Section 6. Use of Replay Television Equipment

Officials may use courtside replay equipment, videotape or television monitoring to:

12. Correct an error when a request is made from a player, coach or official. (Note: If the player or coach requests a review under correctable errors 2-10.c, .d or .e, his or her team shall be assessed a timeout if he or she is incorrect, but shall not be assessed a timeout if he or she is correct.)

c. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

1. Determine if a try for goal is a successful two- or three-point attempt;

To me, this says that if an official signals a two-point goal and the coach thinks it was a three, the coach can request that the play be reviewed under 2-10.e. I think that's what the Baylor coach was doing.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Lotto
I think it does fall under 2.10e, erroneously counting or canceling a score, at least in NCAA. There's some evidence for this in the rulebook:

To me, this says that if an official signals a two-point goal and the coach thinks it was a three, the coach can request that the play be reviewed under 2-10.e. I think that's what the Baylor coach was doing.

You're saying this is the case in college, right? I'm sure that's not correct in high school.

[brainbrian]

Originally posted by rainmaker
You're saying this is the case in college, right? I'm sure that's not correct in high school.

Correct.

NFHS Rule 2-2-1 "... The use of any replay or television monitoring equipment by the game officials in making any decision relating to the game is prohibited."

[BktBallRef]

It has to do with the play being reviewable on the monitor, Juules. It's completely an NCAA issue.

[Lotto]

Everyone's right...I was quoting from the NCAA rulebook, which makes it clear that the issue of whether a goal is a two or a three does fall under the correctable error rule. I didn't know what the Fed ruling was about this until it was posted here. (I officiate high school ball under slightly modified NCAAW rules.)

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Did the refs signal a 3? If not, I don't think this is fixable. A scoretable error is, (I mean, if they wrote in 2 instead of 3), but not under 2-10. Is the correctable error rule different in college than hs? In high school, this isn't a correctable error. The coach can't go to the table for this, and there's no "charged or not-charged a time-out". But it is fixable up to the time the book is signed off, and the refs are off the court. ... if the refs had signalled a 3. If they thought it was a 2, then it's just too bad for that team.

It would definitely be wrong in hs to stop play, especially when the opponent has the ball! I guess even the best refs (and Melissa Barlow is definitely one of the best!!) can make mistakes once in a while.

rainmaker, this is a correctable error in HS.

Officials indicating a 2 (by lack of a signal) and it should have been a 3 is no different than indicating a 3 when it should be a 2. It's erronesouly counting a score. This is correctable until the next dead ball becomes live. Of course, the officials can't use any media for determining it...but only consulting each other. Perhaps they just goofed and didn't signal.

The scorebook error is when the official indicates 2 and the scorer records 3 (and vice versa)...fixable until the final score is approved.

I'm for stopping play ASAP for a potential correctable error (but not when either team is actively attacking). If the other team is walking it up the court or passing back and forth 30' from the basket....I'll stop the play. The longer you delay once you know there might be an error, the less likely you'll be able to get it right. It might be 5 minutes before there is another dead ball.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

rainmaker, this is a correctable error in HS.

Officials indicating a 2 (by lack of a signal) and it should have been a 3 is no different than indicating a 3 when it should be a 2. It's erronesouly counting a score. This is correctable until the next dead ball becomes live. Of course, the officials can't use any media for determining it...but only consulting each other. Perhaps they just goofed and didn't signal.

The scorebook error is when the official indicates 2 and the scorer records 3 (and vice versa)...fixable until the final score is approved.

I'm for stopping play ASAP for a potential correctable error (but not when either team is actively attacking). If the other team is walking it up the court or passing back and forth 30' from the basket....I'll stop the play. The longer you delay once you know there might be an error, the less likely you'll be able to get it right. It might be 5 minutes before there is another dead ball.

Camron, did you see the play on Tuesday evening? The ref whistled it dead right in the middle of the opponent's play. They weren't actively attacking, but they were trying to do something.

Also, I don't understand what you say about a ref signalling or not signalling a 3-point shot. You said, "indicating a 2 (by lack of a signal) and it should have been a 3 is no different than indicating a 3 when it should be a 2." What does "should have been" mean? If the refs didn't signal, doesn't that mean it wasn't a 3? That's in effect a no-call, right? Can the coach stop the game to argue a no-call? I don't understand your point here.

[JRutledge]

It does not matter what the official signals or does not signal. If the play is close and the officials are unsure, they can look at the play. The signal or the call does not matter. All that matters is that the officials are unclear or disagree and they can look at the monitor.

That might not answer your question, but that is the procedure. Correctable error rules do not apply here.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

rainmaker,
I'm surprised that you didn't know this one. Camron is right. It is a correctable error in NFHS. (It is as well in NCAA.) See case book play 2.10.1 Situation F.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
rainmaker,
I'm surprised that you didn't know this one. Camron is right. It is a correctable error in NFHS. (It is as well in NCAA.) See case book play 2.10.1 Situation F.

I know that.

My question isn't about a situation when an official knows it's a 3, but forgets to signal, or the scorer does it wrong. My question is about a situation where the official sees the play, doesn't think it's a 3, doesn't signal and the game goes on. The coach can't stop the game to argue about it, can she? Shouldn't she just assume it was a 2? In this case the official didn't inadvertently set aside a rule, she just didn't see the shot as a 3--pointer. How is that correctable?

Or, look at 2.10.1 G. Not correctable.

[Edited by rainmaker on Apr 7th, 2005 at 02:15 AM]

[rainmaker]

Okay, I went back and watched the play, the whistle, the whole thing again. For those who missed it, here's the short version.

Baylor player A1 had the ball at the top of the arc. She stepped in about two steps, so she was near the free-throw line. Shot the ball, hit. MSU takes it out, comes down the floor, they're setting up, ball is right by the Baylor coach, and so is Melissa Barlow, the official at C. You can see Barlow lean back, then turn a little and listen to the coach, then she blows her whistle, and turns completely to the coach. They talk briefly. Then Lisa Mattingly comes over (I assume she's crew chief), and Barlow steps over to her. They talk briefly, then Barlow goes back to the Baylor coach, they talk briefly, Mattingly bounces the ball to Barlow, and that's that. Okay, so that wasn't the short version.

My questions are 1) by NCAA rules, was that handled correctly? I'm guessing not. Can someone enlighten me about how it should have been?

1-a) I don't see how the coach could have thought it was a 3. For those who saw the play, do you think she was just working the ref? How could she have made such a glaring mis-perception?

2) By Fed rules, was that handled correctly? I know not. This is not a correctable error, because there was no error. Besides it's never okay to stop the game like that, is it?

If the coach thought it was an error, she can go to the table, and they can buzz at the next dead ball. But since there was no error, the coach will then be charged a time-out.

[JRutledge]

It could be possible that was not the issue being discussed (I am talking about the shot). It could have been that something else was at play. By your description of the play, I do not think I would have stopped play if they were only discussing whether a 2 or a 3 was the issue. I am also assuming that they did not look at the monitor to be sure based on your description.

Peace