The Official Forum - Something not to do at end of game.

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Something not to do at end of game. (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/24619-something-not-do-end-game.html)

Quote:

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

Originally posted by jeffpea
Coaches should be able to call time outs.

Why? Other than the fact that they want to, why should they? They're not participating in the play. They're not in control of the ball. They don't have any more reason to expect to call a TO than any other sub on the bench -- other than the fact that many of them just assume that it's their right.

I'd much rather not have to take my eyes away from a play to verify who's requesting the TO.

We had an unfortunate case last night in a local boys varsity game. A1 is trapped near the table. Official hears "Time out" and - obviously this is one of those situations where a coach might be trying to save the player/possession - and blows his whistle. Alas, the call had apparently come from Team B's bench area, and, for two, Team B's head coach claims to have not called it. It may have been a player on Team B's bench - but why would he? The official charged the time-out to Team B. It was their last time out in a close game.

Before anyone thinks hubristically - this was a loud situation and the ref was close to the play and both benches . . .

Properly granting a time out called by a head coach can often take seconds, during which the coach has called, then screamed. The gain - a little control for the coach - isn't worth the inherent sloppiness of trying to execute this. An experiment whose time has come and should go.

Quote:

Originally posted by assignmentmaker

Quote:

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

Originally posted by jeffpea
Coaches should be able to call time outs.

Why? Other than the fact that they want to, why should they? They're not participating in the play. They're not in control of the ball. They don't have any more reason to expect to call a TO than any other sub on the bench -- other than the fact that many of them just assume that it's their right.

I'd much rather not have to take my eyes away from a play to verify who's requesting the TO.

We had an unfortunate case last night in a local boys varsity game. A1 is trapped near the table. Official hears "Time out" and - obviously this is one of those situations where a coach might be trying to save the player/possession - and blows his whistle. Alas, the call had apparently come from Team B's bench area, and, for two, Team B's head coach claims to have not called it. It may have been a player on Team B's bench - but why would he? The official charged the time-out to Team B. It was their last time out in a close game.

Before anyone thinks hubristically - this was a loud situation and the ref was close to the play and both benches . . .

Properly granting a time out called by a head coach can often take seconds, during which the coach has called, then screamed. The gain - a little control for the coach - isn't worth the inherent sloppiness of trying to execute this. An experiment whose time has come and should go.

Hear! Hear! I wonder if this whole rule change had its roots in Chris Webber.

The non-timeout call in our game this week was a play called 'five up' or some such thing. I'm standing right in front of the coach when he calls the play, so I hear him loud and clear. My partner, 40 feet away, hears 'time out' instead of the play called by the coach and blows his whistle. Both the coach and I gave him the same look, I think. Fortunately, it wasn't during a crucial moment or anything like that, and I told the coach that my partner's eyesight was fine, it's his hearing that isn't so good.