i'm a little confused on the language used in casebook ruling 2.10.1.f regarding erroneously counting of a goal. Does it mean that the error occurred because the official did not signal the 3 or because the official did not see it clearly a 3?

A shot is clearly behind the 3 point arc but the official did not signal. The coach of the shooting team is able to question the call within the proper timeframe. During the discussion, the opposing coach and scorekeeper point out that there was no signal made. But, the official definitely knows that it was a 3 but he just didn't signal. In this case, it does not matter because the "mistake" was pointed out in time.

My question is what if the same play happened but it was more than 2 dead balls later? The official definitely knows that it was a 3 but for some reason or other he did not signal. Would you just "fix" this because it was poor mechanic or has this got to be a correctable error play? Is this the intent of this rule?

Mulk

It's a correctable error. It must be corrected within the time frame. It's no different than failing to award a merited FT. It's a mistake that the official(s) made.

Now, if the 3 point FG was signalled and the scorer fails to record it properly, you now have a score book error which can be corrected later, without regard to a time frame.

Tony,

So, even if the official knew that it was a 3 and he knows that he did not signal, it has gotten to "corrected" within the timeframe? The error was for not using the signaling mechanic ?What if there was no signal but the scorer put up 3 points anyway? Later, the other coach points out that no signal was made. Do you take the point off?

Mulk

Mulk, if the official made the error- wrong signal or no signal, then their error has to be corrected within the time frame outlined in the book.

If the score made the error, it can be corrected right up until "game over" time.

That's all you have to remember.

Guys,

I want to make sure that you are saying that the error is for not signaling? And, only for not signaling? I would think that the error would be for not counting the score. Everybody in the gym knows, including the official, that it was a 3. For example, the scorekeeper puts up the score even though no signal was made by the official. The point is on the board. I'm the coach and I didn't see the signal but I noticed that 3 was put up. Am i going to the table to correct the lack of signal? Or, am i to assume that no error has been made? If I am the opposing coach, will i just wait for 2 dead balls and go over to point out that there was no signal made, therefore making this a 2?

All the other correctable errors have nada to do with signaling. Just want to make sure.

Mulk

If it's a 3, I don't signal and the scorer puts 3 in the book, then the scorer has already corrected the correctable error before they told me it was an error. :)

If it was a 3 and I didn't signal, but the scorer put 3 on the board and in the book, then the scorer made an error too. The correct thing to do if the time interval has passed is to credit the scoring team with only 2 points.

If the time interval hasn't passed and it is brought to my attention, I will admit that the mistake was mine and the team will receive 3 points.

2.10.1 Situation F gives good guidance on this type of error.

If it was a 3, I know it was a 3, and I didn't signal, I am not going to change it if I go to the book and the scorer has a 3. That may not be the letter of the rule but I can't beleive the intent is take take the 3 out of the book when the scorer did the right thing.

Now, you can change it and by rule, you wouldn't be wrong but I'm not changing it.

The error is not recognizing the score and awarding it. Signalling is part of that. The error in the case play is not looking clearly and not thus not acknowledging that the shot was from behind the arc. He just wasn't paying attention. If the ref knows it's a 3 and doesn't signal, what's going on? If he'd looked and seen, and still not awarded the 3, he'd have a lot more problems than whether it was an error under rule 2-10!

If it was a 3 and I didn't signal, but the scorer put 3 on the board and in the book, then the scorer made an error too. The correct thing to do if the time interval has passed is to credit the scoring team with only 2 points.

If the time interval hasn't passed and it is brought to my attention, I will admit that the mistake was mine and the team will receive 3 points.

2.10.1 Situation F gives good guidance on this type of error.

Nevada Ref,

Then you agree that the error is for not signaling? Do you think that is the intent of this correctable error? It just seems to me it should be about the score. Also, how does the coach even know that an error has been made if the score is on the board?

I am not disagreeing with you but, I would really like to see a casebook ruling where the play had the ref not signaling but the scorer putting up the 3.

Yea, that's correct by the rule, but I don't know anyone who wouldn't leave the three and thank the scorer for bailing one out.

Also note that the error isn't just in the not signalling. It's also not recognizing that the shot needed a ruling. Being asleep. Watching the wrong area. Or some such thing.

Juulie,

What's the difference between this and giving the ball to the wrong team as in the previous thread?

Are you enforcing the rules or not? (Of course I would do the same thing, but I find your response, ummm, interesting considering the other thread).

--Rich

On this particular application of the rule, it all comes down to the signal.

2-10-1e says, "Erroneously counting or canceling a score."

The way an official counts a three-point goal is by giving the proper signal. Failure to give that signal means the basket is only worth two points. Thus, here a lack of action from an official has erroneously canceled a point.
So we have a correctable error.

That's my understanding of the ruling.

In terms of the rules, in this sitch, the "correction" was made before the ball came into play. I mean, the officials (if you include the timer as an official) got the play right, right away. It wasn't error-then-more-play-then-more-play-then-more-play-then-basket and THEN correction. And the end result was that the play was correct right away. Which is a lot different from the previous thread where the officials got it wrong, and didn't don anything about it for a while.