Coach can call a to rule

[zanzibar]

I wish the NF would change the rule where the head coach can call a to. I think the NF should go back to the old rule where the players had to call the to.
When they adopted the current rule, I did't fore see the problems. I get as much grief over this situation as any other.
In my area the coaches begin the game with the strategy of requesting a to when their team is about to gain control or lose control of the ball during scrambling situations. The coaches get extremely frustrated when they don't get the to when they ask for it. Sometimes the held ball, foul, violation, or oob happens before you can recognize the to.
Do you agree that the rule is very hard to enforce without infuriating the teams.
Here are some of the situations I'm sure officials encounter.
1. A1 is triple teamed, about to step on the oob line, about to travel, he's being hacked at, a gym full of screamers, and from 50 feet away the coach is asking for a to.
2. It's hard to recognize who's calling the to. This takes time sometimes.
3. Sometimes it takes time to determine who's geting the ball and who's calling a to.
4. Coaches are constantly yelling out strategy that sounds like time out. (ex. 3 out, pull it out, 4 out)
I'm guessing the rules committee didn't adopt the rule for the reasons its being used.
I think the coaches would be in favor of the current rule, but if I was on the rules committee this rule would be at the top of my list for change. Other opinions, please. Staighten me out if my opinion is not a good one.

[Redhouse]

The HC and players can request a time out. The only people on the floor that can call a time out are the officials. Just because someone request it does not mean that they are going to get it because of all the reasons you cited.

IMO, the HC should train their players on when the should request a timeout. If they are double or triple teamed and can't get out of it or the are being pressed in the backcourt they should also be aware of the time situation.

I feel that the rule is fine the way it is written. I think more coaches should teach their players when it is appropriate to request a timeout.

[M&M Guy]

I agree with Redhouse - the coaches need to be reminded they can REQUEST a timeout, but only a referee can GRANT it. It's a fine line, but I think more coaches are starting to understand it. Some coaches may just be frustrated when there's a turnover as they are asking for the TO, and they may direct that frustration towards you, but it's not your fault if you can't hear the request over the screaming throng. I like the idea of the coach being able to request the TO. Sometimes it's just keeping that line of communication open.

[ChrisSportsFan]

His players can help him out with requesting time outs. If the coach hasn't taken the time to teach his players when to "use one", that's not our prob. I usually mention to capts in the pregame that "we'll be watching you and not your coach so if he wants a timeout, you need to help him out".

Sometimes coaches get mad at us for not honoring the TO request, but he didn't have control of the ball so we couldn't (shrug).

[JRutledge]

I have gotten so used to the rule. It does not matter to me anymore. If a coach requests the timeout and I do not see him, I do not grant it. If that coach complains, I make it clear I do not grant timeouts with a coach out of my vision. I will tell coaches you need to have your players aware of when you are calling timeouts. I used to worry about it, but not anymore. There are many interpretations and examples that make it clear what the officials are supposed to do. At some point the coaches need to pick up a rulebook or read about what officials do. They get upset over everything else, why not this?

Peace

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by M&M Guy
I agree with Redhouse - the coaches need to be reminded they can REQUEST a timeout, but only a referee can GRANT it. It's a fine line, but I think more coaches are starting to understand it. Some coaches may just be frustrated when there's a turnover as they are asking for the TO, and they may direct that frustration towards you, but it's not your fault if you can't hear the request over the screaming throng. I like the idea of the coach being able to request the TO. Sometimes it's just keeping that line of communication open.

You guys are over looking the problem. It's not the semantics of calling a TO verses requesting one. It's the fact that coaches think the TO should be granted when the yell, no matter the situation.

IMHO, it puts the coaches in a position they shouldn't be in- it puts them in the game and on the floor! We don't need that.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by BktBallRef


You guys are over looking the problem. It's not the semantics of calling a TO verses requesting one. It's the fact that coaches think the TO should be granted when the yell, no matter the situation.

Who cares what coaches think? They think a lot of things that are completely wrong. They think we are supposed to talk to them no matter what as well. I do not care what coaches think. Officials should feel the same.

Originally posted by BktBallRef
IMHO, it puts the coaches in a position they shouldn't be in- it puts them in the game and on the floor! We don't need that.

There are a lot of things we do not need, but they happen. I was opposed to this rule when they put it in. I have just adjusted my thinking and accept that it is here to stay. They have even changed the rules in other sports I work to mirror this. If a coach complains, you explain what the dilly-oh is.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

You guys are over looking the problem. It's not the semantics of calling a TO verses requesting one. It's the fact that coaches think the TO should be granted when the yell, no matter the situation.

IMHO, it puts the coaches in a position they shouldn't be in- it puts them in the game and on the floor! We don't need that.

I think we actually agree about the coaches, but this also points out it IS about semantics. A lot of coaches think the TO happens when they say, "Time out!". When we don't grant it, for whatever reason, it's our fault and their team just got hosed. They don't understand the difference between asking and granting. The coaches that do understand the difference know how to ask us when they're nearby, or have a player get our attention, without being on the floor. The smarter coaches also have a tendancy to have smarter players.

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

You guys are over looking the problem. It's not the semantics of calling a TO verses requesting one. It's the fact that coaches think the TO should be granted when the yell, no matter the situation.

IMHO, it puts the coaches in a position they shouldn't be in- it puts them in the game and on the floor! We don't need that.

I wouldn't say that anyone is overlooking it. We know it's an issue but that's what it is. Sometimes when a game becomes very intense, I'll remind a coach that it's his job to get our attention if he wants a TO. The other thing is that we know if a coach "should" be taking a timeout and sometimes it's worth it to take a peek his way to see if he's asking for it.

[BktBallRef]

Coaches being able to request TO from the bench because of something that happens on the floor IS AN ISSUE. It's a bad rule and no amount of us trying to educate them on the "request vs. calling" semantic is going to fix the problem. The problem is greater than that.

[FrankHtown]

Hypothetical..Trail is table side...first half , 2 person, coach sees a trap coming up at midcourt, his player passes midcourt and is immediately trapped. We hear someone yelling time out. We turn around to see if it is really the head coach...we pick him up ...and it really is the head coach. We turn around to pick up the play. Team B has knocked the ball loose, and is heading for an uncontested lay up.

That's why i don't like the rule the way it is written. Make the players call time out.

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally posted by FrankHtown
Hypothetical..Trail is table side...first half , 2 person, coach sees a trap coming up at midcourt, his player passes midcourt and is immediately trapped. We hear someone yelling time out. We turn around to see if it is really the head coach...we pick him up ...and it really is the head coach. We turn around to pick up the play. Team B has knocked the ball loose, and is heading for an uncontested lay up.

That's why i don't like the rule the way it is written. Make the players call time out.

True. Let's look at this from this angle...Coach is yelling to "get back on defense", or "get your hands up", "box out and get the rebound", or "cut, I said cut", is he yelling for us to do those things or his players? He could yell to his players to call a TO. IMO, the current rule is fine, players just need to understand their responsibility here and step up.

[stosh]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Coaches being able to request TO from the bench because of something that happens on the floor IS AN ISSUE. It's a bad rule and no amount of us trying to educate them on the "request vs. calling" semantic is going to fix the problem. The problem is greater than that.

The best way to demonstrate the difference between them "requesting" and "calling" is when for whatever reason you don't grant them the TO and they still end up with the ball (OOB off of opponent in a tie up situation, for example). Ask the coach "You still want the TO you ASKED for?" the answer is always "nope".

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Coaches being able to request TO from the bench because of something that happens on the floor IS AN ISSUE. It's a bad rule and no amount of us trying to educate them on the "request vs. calling" semantic is going to fix the problem. The problem is greater than that.

I have found it not to be an issue. It is just one of those parts of the game that make basketball officiating interesting.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by FrankHtown
Hypothetical..Trail is table side...first half , 2 person, coach sees a trap coming up at midcourt, his player passes midcourt and is immediately trapped. We hear someone yelling time out. We turn around to see if it is really the head coach...we pick him up ...and it really is the head coach. We turn around to pick up the play. Team B has knocked the ball loose, and is heading for an uncontested lay up.

That's why i don't like the rule the way it is written. Make the players call time out.

If you've got a trap,double-team,triple-team,whatever in your primary, do not turn away from that play to look at the bench. Keep officiating the play. If the coach can't understand "why" you didn't look at the bench at that particular moment to confirm who was requesting the TO, too bad.

If you're at 4 on a 5-second closely guarded count, and you hear a TO request behind you out of your vision, would you stop the count to turn around and confirm that the head coach was calling the TO?

As Tony said, terrible rule.