Another "Time out or no time out" question...

[Indy_Ref]

I can't stand this call, but here it goes:

Any player grabs the ball as it is going out of bounds. The player has control of the ball but obviously is not touching the floor. The player calls timeout and then lands out of bounds. I almost always see the official grant the timeout. Why do we do this? I have actually seen this call split at the high school level, some give the TO, some don't. It is always given at the men's college level. Why do we grant a TO in this instance? Is there a rule that covers this? Or just the fact that he has control, allows him to call for the TO. Is it in the casebook?

Casey

[This message has been edited by Indy_Ref (edited January 11, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Indy_Ref (edited January 11, 2000).]

[Camron Rust]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indy_Ref on 01-11-2000 04:27 PM
I can't stand this call, but here it goes:

Any player grabs the ball as it is going out of bounds. The player has control of the ball but obviously is not touching the floor. The player calls timeout and then lands out of bounds. I almost always see the official grant the timeout. Why do we do this? I have actually seen this call split at the high school level, some give the TO, some don't. It is always given at the men's college level. Why do we grant a TO in this instance? Is there a rule that covers this? Or just the fact that he has control, allows him to call for the TO. Is it in the casebook?

Casey

---

The player has met all the requirements for being granted a timeout. If there is player control, they can be granted a timeout. Only in the NBA is there a clause forbiding a timeout when the player in control is in the air over the OOB area.

Unfortunately, too many of the HS officials call the game based on what they see in NBA extravaganzas (they are NOT games, at least not basketball)

[Alaska Ref]

Indy,
we as referee's should not penalize a good "Heads up Play" by a player or a coach. If a player qualify's as in control of the ball, they have every right to request a time out and it should be granted!
Hope they still have one.
Good Luck

------------------
Don

[Indy_Ref]

Yes, guys, that is the only reason I could think of to legally grant the timeout...again, I don't like the call, but I don't have a problem making the right call...to grant the timeout.

Thanks for patting me on the back and telling me it's ok!

[bob jenkins]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indy_Ref on 01-11-2000 04:27 PM
I can't stand this call, but here it goes:

Any player grabs the ball as it is going out of bounds. The player has control of the ball but obviously is not touching the floor. The player calls timeout and then lands out of bounds. I almost always see the official grant the timeout. Why do we do this?

---

Why do we do this? Because Case 5.8.3D says to do it.

[b_silliman]

To expand a little bit,
With the coach now being allowed to call timeouts, situations arise when it makes it difficult to hear the coach and react properly.

a. players scrambling for a loose ball - generally I will not grant a timeout because from the coach's box he cannot tell when possession is gained.

b. the original situation where a player is going out-of-bounds - again the coach is too far away from the action.

Last week I had a coach yelling for a timeout which took me a long time to recognize because he would say "time, 1sec, 2sec 3sec, out."

I told the coach to put the two words together since it sounded like the beginning of a play when separating the words. The next time he called for a timeout the words were together and I instantly granted him his request.

[Mark Padgett]

As stated above, there is no reason to not grant a timeout in this situation if a team is legally entitled to one. I always figure that if they want to give up a precious timeout to avoid a turnover, that's their decision. I have no problem at all with making the call, and I hope it isn't changed because it does reflect the player control rule as it stands.