Comments On NFHS Changes
 

My local IAABO board interpreter recently asked for my comments on the 2006-07 NFHS Rule Changes and Points of Emphasis. Since this Forum has been a little slow lately, I thought that I would offer to the Forum the text of my comments and invite Forum members to offer their comments:

To me, what stands out the most about the changes and POE, is that we a have been asked to increase our job as the "fashion police". It started years ago when Patrick Ewing started wearing an undershirt under his Georgetown jersey. After that the NFHS came up with all kinds of rules regarding undershirts, color, sleeve length, etc. Later it became fashionable to wear compression shorts under the game shorts. Once again the NFHS came up with rules regarding the color and length of the compression shorts. Michael Jordon started wearing a headband, and the NFHS responded with headband rules about single color, logo size, etc. When "hip hop" fashion filtered down to the basketball court, the NFHS responded with rules about shorts being pulled up and jerseys being kept tucked in. Last year we were asked to charge technical fouls to players who used their uniforms in several unsportsmanlike ways. Now we are again being asked to check on headbands for color and uniformity and rules have been added to check on sweatbands.

My problem is that many of our officials will chose not to enforce these "fashion police" rules because, in their opinion, these rules have nothing to do with the "game of basketball". Other officials will chose to enforce these rules as directed by the NFHS. Over the course of a season, especially at the beginning of a season, the lack of consistency among officials will make us look like a bunch of idiots. I believe that it's of utmost importance for our IAABO state interpreters to not only explain the rule changes to their respective IAABO boards next year, but to stress the importance of consistency in the enforcement of these "fashion" rules.

In my opinion, it should be up to the coaches to make sure that their players are properly equipped. The NFHS has asked us to ask the coaches during the pregame coaches and captains meeting if their players are properly equipped and if they know how to wear their uniforms properly. Maybe the NFHS needs to put some "meat" into the coaches response to that question. Instead of officials constantly asking players to flip over their headband to the uniform color side, or to pull up their shorts, or to pull down their sweatbands, or to tuck in their jersey, or to sit out a tick of the clock because their jersey is untucked, perhaps a technical foul issued to the head coach early in the game, and early in the season, would alleviate many of these problems. But once again, it would go back to which officials would enforce this rule and which ones would view this as not part of the "game of basketball" and not enforce this rule.

I am very disappointed that the NFHS did not take away the right of a coach to call a time out from the bench. Since this rule was introduced a few years ago, I'm sure that many officials have had problems giving time outs, in many cases at critical points in the game, because their attention must be directed to the bench rather than the court. It is my understanding that the NBA recently added a rule that allows coaches to call a time out from the bench. Now that this rule has reached the NBA level, I'm sure that there will be no going back to the old rule. I'm positive that the members of the NFHS Rules Committee have never been put into a situation where with seconds to go in a two-official, closely contested game, when a key play is about to occur, possibly involving a foul or a violation, "somebody" from outside your line of sight, yells "time out".

A lot of the uniform rules come right from other sports and the NF tries to develop consistency between sports when it comes to rules. For example the change that requires all sweatbands to be below the elbow. This was a football rule and was a pain in the behind to enforce by telling multiple players to move their sweatbands down. We have been enforcing these rules ever since I have been officiating; it just was the compression shorts when I started. These types of situations are not going to change how I enforce them.

I have come to grips with the coach calling timeout. I tell coaches I am not looking at them and they better get their players in the habit of calling timeouts if they want to be sure they will get one granted. I have learned not to turn around or turn away from a play just so I can grant the request based on the coach. If coaches are not smart enough to realize that, shame on them. The rules back us up on this not to grant a timeout if we do not see it. So the coaches better adjust.

Peace

I think that allowing the coach to call a time-out is a good thing. How many times have we been standing next to the coach during a free throw at the end of a game and the coach says, "Ref, give me a time-out on the make." If the NFHS changed the rule, this would technically not be allowed.

I've gotten in the habit of making sure that I glance towards the bench during those game situations where we "know" that the team probably wants a time-out - i.e. when the other team goes on a run, or the team turns the ball over several times giving the other team momentum, etc. Many times as soon as I look over I see the coach requesting the time-out. Most times the players have not yet realized it yet and it would take extra effort on the coach's part to get his players' attention and have one of them call the time-out.

As Rut said - bottom line is that the onus falls on the coach. Simply saying, "Time out!" is not enough - from a player OR a coach, unless the official can clearly see who is requesting the time-out. If we simply make an effort to realize the situations where a team is likely to call a time-out I think that we avoid most problems.

I was digging around the "Basketball Handbook" late last night looking through the rules changes over the years. The NFHS has been in the "fashion police" business for many, many years. The only thing I can figure is that they want to keep the game looking like "the game of basketball." Personally I think it's kind of silly, but I can definitely see how not regulating uniforms would lead to fashion chaos.

As for assessing a technical foul, I'm sure that it has occurred to the NFHS. They seem to have a real bent for "cracking down hard" on "heinous" offenses like this. Think about the swinging elbows and leaving the court. Unfortunately, you'd see even less enforcement if they made it a technical. Who wants to assess such a draconian penalty for a fashion faux pas? Sometimes I think the rules committee live on another planet.


As for the coach calling a time out, I really like the compromise position the committee floated: allow the coach to call a timeout only during a dead ball and stopped clock. That gives the coach more flexibility than if he couldn't call one, but keeps the official's focus on the floor. But I also agree with Junker that it's not too difficult to learn to glance at the bench at "the usual times" when timeouts are frequently wanted. I would also definitely support a rule change that requires a coach to request both verbally and visually. That would go a long way toward asuaging the bonehead coach who loses his temper because I didn't hear him calmly ask for a timeout during the heat of battle. Make him signal, and I won't have to suggest it to him after he didn't get the timeout he wanted. :rolleyes:

Say what?:confused:

Technically, this <b>isn't</b> allowed and never has been allowed. The coach must still make the request <b>after</b> the FT is made.

You say "Fine, coach. Give me a request on the make".

Please - I really hope that you are kidding! What kind of game management is that? The coach makes the request, you acknowledge it, and give it to him if the free throw is made.

Nope, not kidding at all.

We train our guys to call it by the rules. Keeps us all outa trouble.

And it has <b>never</b> been technically allowed under NFHS rules.....

Brad, I'm going to agree to agree with the Jurassic One on this point. I have always asked the coach to give me the request again after the make. Otherwise, there are so many things being done wrong; the TO is requested during a dead ball, but granted only after the ball has become alive, then dead again. In basketball terms, that's a long time later, and certainly not the way the rule is written. Or, what if A is shooting the FT, and it's B's coach asking for the TO to set up his last-shot offense - are you in effect granting a TO while the other team has the ball? What if the coach changes his mind because something else happens, and you stop play even though the coach now doesn't want the TO?

Now, all that said, I agree it's good game management to acknowledge the coach, but I've always asked them to verify the request after the made FT. Most of the time, all the coach has to do is nod their head, and I grant the TO. Once they've made me aware they will want that TO, I'll be aware of that coach, and they won't have to yell or jump in front of me to call it. It just seems as though there are more things that could go wrong if you don't do things "by the book".

To me, it gets us in more trouble when we handle things "technically" rather than recognizing game situations and using common sense. Making the coach jump through hoops by asking us again three seconds later, after the free throw is made, is pretty silly IMHO.

Michael Jordon may have worn a headband but Micheal Jordan never did.

I'm with Jurassic on this one. "OK coach, I'll be looking at you to request it if it goes in."

I've seen coaches change their mind at the last second and decide that they really don't want the time-out after all.

Z

Brad, sure glad that you fixed the "search" feature". :) Here's a good discussion....

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...e+out+requests

-edited to fix link...

99 times outta 100, it makes perfect sense. But, I don't agree it's making a coach jump through hoops to ask for the TO; in fact, we're giving him a break so he doesn't have to work extra hard to get our attention during that in-bounds play. It's just that 1 time out of 100 that will bite us in the butt if we let that become a habit. What if the coach asks us for the TO, then, while the ball's in the air, the assistant leans over and tells the head coach he's out of TO's. We blow the whistle, and it costs them a T, even though, at the moment he actually can request it, he didn't want it. So, what do you do then? Call it an inadvertant whistle? Then B's coach gets on your case because you just stopped their open fast break.

Again, I agree it's good management to be aware when a TO is coming. But, it still makes more sense to have them make the request when they actually can, by the rules.

Brad,

I am going to have to disagree with you on this one. I am not giving a TO without the coach actually making the request at the proper time. I tell them, "You need to ask me when the shot goes." I do not want someone to think I gave him a break or that they did not ask. I have never had a problem with this application. It is kind of like when in baseball a coach tells you he will a half inning from now reenter the starter before he subs in a player. I let them know what they need to do and we move on. I have never had a problem with a coach telling them this.

Peace

For what it's worth, I agree that you require the coach to make the request at the proper time.

So are you going to make the coach actually say the words "Time-out" or show the little t signal with their hands? Or will direct eye contact and a nod from the coach be enough?

I'm going with the eye contact/nod since they have already communicated it to me - I want the definite request so it doesn't come back to bite me later, but I'm not making them say it in exactly a certain way...

Fine. Then allow coaches to request timeout during a dead ball, not a live ball. And yes, you require him to make the request at the proper time.

That's not the issue, Brad. I don't think anyone has a problem with those requests. The problem arises when they want a tiemout during a live ball, when they try to become part of the game on the floor. I'm speaking of situations where there's about to be a held ball, or A1 is trapped in the corner, or A2 is being pressured in the BC. In those situations, our focus has to be on the players on the floor, not somebody yelling "TIMEOUT!" behind us.

Those are the situations that concern those of us who don't like the rule. Like I said, make it available to them during dead balls only and it would be fine IMHO.

Is this a regional application of the rules? :D

Peace

This is getting silly.

If you're standing next a coach and he mutters "Timeout on the make" during any part of a free throw - or while his player or an opponent puts up a field goal attempt - then give it to him. Just give him the TO & move on.

IMO to make him ask again makes you an annoying irritant.

That would be great. I will keep making the suggestion annually.

Maybe someday it will happen.

BINGO. This "micro-dotting" of the rules is something that tends to get a lot of officials in trouble with coaches. Just because you are technically right doesn't mean that you are doing the right thing as far as common sense / game management is concerned.

Fashion Police
 

There is nothing wrong with the uniform rules. People will always push things to the max.

We make the kids tuck in their shirts, so what's wrong with telling them their headbands need to be color coordinated...

I am not sure I am a fan of the sweatband below the elbow rule but it will be easy to enforce.

If an official cant enfore a simple jersey requirement what other rules will they choose to ignore becuse it has nothing to do with basketball?

If there is a rule that differs from the NCAA or NBA simply tell the kid that when they get to the NBA they can do it there but even the NBA requires NO Tshirts (geeting a little loose) Tucking in the shirts, length of shorts etc so what's the big deal.

You get paid to enforce the rules.... when I evaluate the first thing that docks points is the blatant violations of the uniform rule...

Good to know. You doing any evaluating this summer? :D

Allow me to clarify my stand. I don't think you have to make him ask again. But I'm going to get a confirmation that he still wants it. Some coaches will tell you before the first of two. We may have subs come in, a lane violation, anything that could change the situation. All I have to do is turn and ask, "Coach, do you still want it?" He nods. TWEET!

Yes - this is where knowing and understanding the game situation comes into play. What if the free thrower turns and calls a time-out? Chances are that the other coach who originally requested a TO on the make no longer wants it.

You cannot officiate in a vacuum - you must understand what is going on in the game. Anyone can understand the rules - but not everyone can manage a game.

I believe a lot of things like this depend on the way you say things and the way you treat people. I have never had a single problem asking a coach to request a TO at the appropriate time. I do not get in their face or argue with them. I just ask them to make the request after the basket or tell them when to make the request. It is really not that big of a deal. If they get upset about this they will get upset when you ask them to get in the coaching box or when you ask them to get a sub when the rules require such a substitute.

Peace

We're <B>already</B> annoying irritants - we know the rules and they don't. And to top it all off, we don't care who wins. How annoying is that?

Again, 99% of the time, it probably won't get you in trouble. But, it's the 1% that will get you in trouble. I don't think it's "micro-dotting" at all. How would you respond to a coach who tells you at the pre-game that he wants you to call a TO every time the other team goes on a run of 10 straight points? You going to allow that as well? Where do you draw the line as to how far ahead a coach can ask for the TO? Of course I want to know in advance if a coach is going to want a TO, so I can keep an eye on him/her and grant it as soon as possible. That certainly is good game management and common sense. I have never had a coach tell me it's an irritant to nod again for verification when I look at them right after the FT. I think most coaches understand when they can request a TO; those that don't, well, IDGA*!

I've never ever had a coach show even the slightest bit of irritation with me when I've said, "OK coach, I'll be looking at you to call it after this free throw." Not even once. I think most coaches know that it's pretty basic for us to give a T.O. when it's requested and not take reservations for a time-out like we're a restaurant hostess.

If that gets an official "in trouble with a coach," that's a coach issue not an officials issue. I'd love to see a coach send a letter in to an assignor saying, "he made me wait and request the time-out when I actually wanted it." LOL, bring it on. :D

Z

Naw, now you're just using the old tactic that some posters sometimes use here of saying common sense/proper game management principles go hand-in-hand with <b>their</b> opinion <b>only</b>, and anyone that disagrees with them is one of those bad ol' rulebook officials. I kinda expected a little bit more from you, Brad. That kinda argument just don't fly imo; it goes hand-in-hand with something like "you'll never get to a higher level unless you do things the same way I do".


Proper TO management should be included in everybody's pre-game imo. It's also not a bad idea to tell the coaches <b>your</b> expectations during the pre-game period also. Tell 'em that one of you will try to check the bench late-game after made baskets, FT's, etc. for a TO request, but the coach has to be ready with an immediate TO signal, preferably both oral <b>and</b> visual.The officials should be prepared for TO requests in these end-of-game situations, and they should know which official should be taking a quick look at the bench for a request. My feeling is......don't let a coach put you into a situation where he can blame <b>you</b> for <b>not</b> doing <b>his</b> job.

Let the crew follow written procedures, let the coach do his job properly, and then nobody should have any valid b!tches.

Btw, the coach sez gimme a TO if the FT is made. What do you do if there's a violation or a foul during the FT? Still give him the TO? Run over and ask him what he'd like to do now?

NOTE: Please note that the preceding is <b>my</b> opinion only. :)

Well, I'm going with what is easier for <b>me</b>. In a noisy gym in one of those end-of-game situations, I don't think that it's unreasonable at all to expect that a coach should be able to give you the proper visual signal. That's just part of his job imo. If he can nod, he can also make a "T" with his hands.

Agreed. I don't think coaches are expecting you to recognize the TO before the proper time. He tells you during the FTs because he wants you to be looking for it. FT goes in, I look, and then he signals or speaks. If he doesn't for some strange, "Still want it coach?" "Yes." TWEET!

It's not rocket science.

I'm in the minority with Brad and Dan on this. I grant the timeout at the proper time if asked to grant "on the make." I know what he means. Doesn't mean I think any less of the "opposite" opinion -- I see its merits, too -- just reporting what I do on the court.

The bottom line to this is you can do whatever you choose to do. As long as your assignor and fellow officials that you work with are OK with what you do that is fine. I know and have worked with officials that do the very same thing you guys have claimed. To me that is their choice and after all we have many of those things as officials.

Peace

This is the way I handle it as well. As far as the fashion police stuff, I agree that it does seem a little much, but NFHS is that way in alot of sports (baseball in particular). On the other hand, if the coaches would cover it early, it wouldn't be a problem. Last year in a sophmore game before a V game I didn't allow a sub because he was told 3 times to pull his short up. He started onto the floor and I waved him back to the table and told the coach we would let him in at the next dead ball if he is in proper uniform. The crowd was on me for that, but after the game I had 4 coaches from that school (not all basketball) thank me because they hadn't seen anyone else enforce it.

Z -

Table for 3, please?

And please tell me you're not wearing that frilly, black and white outfit?... :eek:

Yep, and the heels too. What's it to ya? :D

Not that there's anything wrong with that...

:D

Can anyone provide a rules reference for this btw?

I didn't look in the nfhs book but from what I can tell the ncaa book does not constrain a coach/player to request a TO only during the time it can be granted. It only says when the official may actually grant a request after it is requested.

I guess it could depend upon how you interpret it, but here's the NFHS rule quote:

5-8-3 . . . Grants a player's/head coach's oral or visual request for a time-out, such request being granted only when:
a. The ball is in control or at the disposal of a player of his/her team.
b. The ball is dead, unless replacement of a disqualified, or injured player(s), or a player directed to leave the game is pending, and a substitute(s) is available and required.

For me the key element in the above rule is the timing of the request by the player or head coach, not the granting by the official. This understanding is strongly supported by the following two casebook plays:

5.8.3 SITUATION D: A1 or A2 requests a time-out: (a) while airborne A1 is holding the ball; (b) while A1's throw-in is in flight toward A2; or (c) when the ball is on the floor at A1's disposal for a throw-in. RULING: The request is granted in (a) and (c), but denied in (b), as there is no player control while the ball is loose between players.

5.8.3 SITUATION F: A1's dribble is “interrupted” when the ball deflects off his/her shoe. A1 or a teammate asks or signals for a time-out as the ball bounces toward: (a) the sideline; or (b) the division line. RULING: The request cannot be granted in (a) or (b), since A1's dribble has been “interrupted” and the ball is loose. (4-15-6c)

For example, in the last play I wouldn't wait until a player of Team A controlled the ball and then belatedly grant the time-out request which A1 or his teammate made previously while the ball was loose and bouncing on the floor. I would need another time-out request which was made while a member of Team A had player control. Perhaps you would not do the same.

Thanks.

Although in the case play it does say the request shall be denied, we can infer that the request shall be denied at that time only to be granted at a later time. Where does it say a request that is made at the wrong time needs to be resubmitted?

FWIW, the relevant ncaa rule is under 5-9, which says:

Art. 3. Grants a player’s visual or oral request for a timeout, such request being granted when:
a. The ball is in control or at the disposal of a player of his or her team.
Exception 1: After the throw-in starts, no timeout shall be granted to the opponents of the throw-in team.
Exception 2: No timeout may be granted during an interrupted dribble.
b. The ball is dead.
c. A disqualified or injured player(s) has been replaced when a substitute(s) is available.
Art. 4. Grants a coach’s request for a timeout, such request being granted only when the coach’s team is in possession of the ball (this includes throwins and free throws) or when the ball is dead. The official must be certain the request was made by the head coach.

I don't see any related AR's.

FWIW2, when I can't grant a request per rule during a loose ball etc I do ask "still want it" when the the coach's team takes control of the ball. Often enough this is a gut reaction by the coach, or even a premediated attempt to get a TO when he knows it's not to be granted by rule. When a coach asks prematurely and conditionally for a TO (ie requests on the make when a shot/FT is in the air) I grant it without re-asking on the make. He's a big boy, I'm assuming he knows what he wants in this case.

As someone else said, it's just what I do. If you feel the need to do differently then do so.

I am with Rich, Dan and Brad on this on this one. What do you do when a coach makes a request as follow?

Sit: Team B is shooting the second of two FT's

Coach: Next dead ball, I want a time-out
Official: Coach, I will look at you, you will have to request a time out again.

Is the ball not dead once it is in the net? per rule 5-8-3b.

What if the shooter misses the FT and they spend several minutes trying to make a shot and then a basket is made. Are you going to award the TO now?

Peace

Yes, and the head coach <b>has</b> to make a request at <b>that</b> time as per the same rule.

Strictly speaking, no it is NOT. The ball is not dead until the goal is made and for that to happen the ball must do more than just enter the basket/net. It must remain in there or pass through. How long it must remain in there before the goal is made is up to the judgment of the official.
And that is per rule 5-1-1.

I don't understand what the big deal is here on the timeout issue, just use common sense and don't say or do anything stupid. In my opinion, a comment like, "I'll be looking for your request on the make," can be superfluous and annoying. I deem it to be a bit on the overly officious side. It is a comment that doesn't need to be made IMO.

On the other hand, too many things can change a coach's mind, and there always could be that 1 time when you blow a whistle for a timeout that the coach doesn't want anymore. Now you've basically put yourself into a bind, because the problems that could result compared to the inconvenience of confirming the request are too large. At the wrong time, you could ruin your game by doing this, or lose a lot of credibility.

The way I deal with these situations is to simply acknowledge the request with a nod, and then when the free throw goes, I look to the coach for the request, or for confirmation. There is nothing overly officious about doing that, but you still do get the confirmation. And there have been cases where the coach changed his mind.

I think I've said this about three times. :)

I can see it now!

Halftime:
Coach: "Ref, I going to want a TO at the first dead ball with under one minute left in the game."
Dan_Ref: "You got it, you stupid ****er!"

:D

Yep, I guess that works in NYC but not in NC. :rolleyes:

Well, if at the half he asks for a TO at the first dead ball with under 1 minute left he is a stupid ****er.

Even in NC I suppose.

NCAA rule 5-9-5 - "The game clock ...shall be stopped when an official recognizes a request by the head coach or a player for a time out <b>AFTER</b> a goal until the subsequent throw-in begins".

Rule 5-1-5 iterates that a "goal" includes a made free throw.

Kinda explicit imo.....sureasheck doesn't say anything about recognizing a request made <b>before</b> a goal is made.

I used to think that was "common sense", too. Then one night the coach told me he wanted the TO on the make. I nodded. The FT went in. I looked at him. He looked at me. I looked at him really hard. He looked at me.

The ball was inbounded, he gave me a "Where is my TO?" look, and I gave him a "You didn't ask" shrug.

Now, when the coach asks for a TO on the make, I say, "I'll stay right here. Just remind me."

The ball becomes monetarily dead after it checks the nets before the throw-in. Not while it is in the nets.

OK - that is just absurd. Coaches do not ask for that. I defy you or anyone else to give me an example that is even close. What they do often request is a time-out after a made free throw. Why? Because it fits the game.

Of course not and no one is suggesting that.

Why do we come up with absurd comments and situations that are completely different than the original situation? We have a coach requesting a time-out on a made free-throw. If the free-throw goes in, give him the darn time-out -- it is that simple.

You are not talking strategy with him (i.e. the 10-point run situation) and you are not being an assistant coach (i.e. if the free throw is missed and there are several shots, etc.). You are simply responding to a very simple and straight-forward request.

There is a place for common sense in basketball officiating. You don't call 3-seconds on the guy that just has one heel barely touching the free-throw lane line. You don't start a game with technicals because the starters weren't marked with 9:45 left on the clock before the game. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Don't bury your nose so far in the rule book that you can't see the basketball game that you are supposed to be officiating.

It is not what you say, it is how you say it.
 

I agree that would be absurd. I would never do that either. I do know that I will just ask a coach to "ask when the shot goes" and put the responsibility on them. I have never, ever had a single problem by asking that. So either way it goes, no one is going to completely agree on this. My telling them to ask at the appropriate time is not a big deal as many of you have made it out to be. In most cases the conversation is a one on one conversation and no one hears the conversation in the first place. I hate to say this, but if you have a certain presence about yourself, you will be amazed what coaches and players will go along with.

Peace

Strictly speaking, who cares? ;)

I've been hesitating to add my two cents on this topic, after reading so many IMO, and wise remarks, I felt appropriate to throw mine in. I think this is a good topic just based on feedback, We all seem to have different ways on what works for us, I also have read many interprtation on what the rules states, I guess everyone could and would treated it different. It all basically comes down to what works best for each individual irregardless what is right and what is wrong. Just know if you don't follow the rule, that you are willing to take the heat etc...I am thankful that I treated the similar situation a different number of ways and lucky enough I haven't got bitten in the A$$. Although you'll never be wrong if you follow the rule..I was actually at a game a couple of years ago, close score, The coach asked for TO after the make the Ref looked right at him and didn't nod, wink, wave or even say TO, the official continued play and the coach ripped a new one. Just the way the ball bounces. The coach did eventualy call a time out after the second FT. But he was a split second from getting a T.

I guess it's the slippery slope theory - if you're already allowing something that's a little outside the way the rules are written, how far before you draw the line? My example was meant to be absurd; I certainly have never had that happen. But if you allow a coach to request the TO in advance, and perhaps even while his team isn't even in control of the ball, where do you draw that line where this situation is ok, but that situation isn't?

But you are, aren't you? <B>If</B> the FT is made, call the TO, but <B>if it's missed</B>, don't do anything. The coach has given you the responsibility of calling it, depending on what happens in the near future.

I really don't think we're too far apart on this issue. I agree it's good common sense to be aware of situations where a TO might be requested. I like the coach telling me he's going to want that TO; it reminds me to keep an eye on them so I don't miss the request in what's usually the hotly-contested last few minutes of a game. And like I said, 99% of the time just automatically granting the TO will not be a problem. It's just that I want to avoid that 1 time where all heck breaks loose because the coach changes his mind, I blow the whistle anyway and stop a fast break, etc. I <B>have</B> seen that happen, and that's not an absurd situation. So all I ask for is that confirmation that the coach still wants it during that period of time when they can legally request it. A nod, wink, signal, whatever. It's one less possibility of getting in trouble.

Where does it say that? The rule says we grant it at that time - not that they have to request it at that time...if someone shoots, and coach says "Time-out if it goes" while the ball is in the air, I'm giving them the time-out after it goes thru...that's per the rule - I granted it at the correct time.

request for TO after made FT
 

If the coach is an habitual a-hole I tell him he/she needs to remind me at the appropriate time. If the coach is the decent sort then I'll look to him/her with a ready whistle after the FT and I always get some sort of gesture that comfirms the TO call.

I have never had a problem with either scenario.


As for absurd scenarios, there is a local GV coach who always tells us in the pre-game that he will use his 30-second T-O's first and his team is so bad he's usually used them up by the end of the 1st quarter.

Did you read the NCAA rule that I cited to Dan? Pretty explicit, isn't it? Can you point me to language anywhere that also talks about granting a TO request made <b>before</b> a goal?

I read the rule Dan posted, read the rule you posted, and actually read the rule out of the book just in case one of you two was lying to me again!!:)

All of the rules refer to "granting" the time-out at the appropriate time or "recognizing the request" at the appropriate time...none of them say that the coach must request it at a specific time.

Dan may lie but Chief ThunderButt never speaks with forked tongue....

Geesh, now I have to add that to my mental picture of the back of a police car... :eek:

So, rocky, I see what you're sayin', but does that mean my absurd scenario about a coach requesting TO in the pre-game if the other team goes on a 10 point run would be legal and allowable?

Yup, picture me sending smoke signals.....:eek:

Thunder-butt??? That's a good one...

And no, the absurd scenarios seldom, if ever, fit the discussion...unless, of course, the coach offers a substantial monetary gratuity for granting said unspoken time-out request. Or maybe if I just think they need a time-out and go ahead and give them one whether the coach wants it or not...

Ok, enough of the absurd scenarios...let's get back to JR having a forked tongue...doesn't that hurt???

No more than any other marital aid....

Bad JR.

Bad, bad JR.

OK, that's just wrong...and BadNews - I have no idea what that picture is, but the server at work won't let it through so I don't really want to know!!!

LOL! :)

That's my point. At what point do you allow a coach to request a TO for later and at one point do you draw the line?

So if the ball is rolling around on the floor, the coach can request a timeout while there's neither team or player control and as soon as one of this players gains control, I must then grant his request? :)

It's no different that what you guys are advocating on the FTs.

Yes Brad, I agree that the example is absurd, just as my example to Dan was absurd. But where do we draw the line?

And what's wrong with simply looking at the coach and expecting a nod that he still wants it?

Nothing. ;)

MUST grant his time-out request? Who said anything about MUST???

Shall = must.

I found this out a while ago.

I gave a very specific situation where I said that I (only me, not speaking for anyone else) WOULD grant the time-out...never said anything about MUST, SHALL, HAD TO, BETTER DO IT OR ELSE, etc...and changing the situation where I said I would grant the t.o. to a different situation and saying they are the same thing doesn't work either...

Ok, ok, even I'm getting confused. I need to stop by the Cleveland Public Library this weekend and sort things out.

But, Tony's and my questions have to with timing - when the coach requests the TO vs. when we actually grant it. In most cases, the request and the granting come at essentially the same time; same dead ball period, same live ball period, etc. In the situation we've had this knock-down, drag-out fight about ( ;) ), the request is made during a dead ball period, the ball becomes live, then dead, then the request is granted. In basketball rules terms, that's a long time. We were just asking if you allow that much time in between the request and granting, where do you draw the line as to "too much time" and then not allowing the request? (Like the absurd examples we've given previously.) We've only been saying the coach has informed us of their intention to call a TO at a particular time, then we can consider the nod, wink, or whatever the actual request, which we then grant. Does that make sense?

It sez when the official is allowed to recognize the request.

It sez nothing at all about when the request should be made.

If it was as clear as you make it out to be the rule would say

"The game clock ...shall be stopped when an official recognizes a request by the head coach or a player for a time out that is made after a goal until the subsequent throw-in begins".

Absolutely it makes sense...but hopefully ;) it also makes sense that "Hey, I want a time-out if the shot goes" is a whole lot different that requesting a time-out when there is a scramble for a loose ball, or when asking for it before the game even starts...

I already told you.

If he requests a TO on the make during a FT or while a shot's in the air.

The Cleveland Library? Better check first to make sure that their book isn't out. Not that it really matters.....I heard that it's been completely colored anyway.

Got your passport ready?

I haven't been trolling around these parts much during the "off-season"...but, I just have to respond to this thread.
Why?
Because I rarely get to DISAGREE with JR! :p

I remember a Varsity game I was doing when I first started out. The same sitch we are discussing happened (except a player requested the "TO after the made FT" per the coach). The FT was made...the other team took the ball and completed a throw-in. The player looked at me like he was hurt, that I didn't grant a TO. I heard the Coach asking him why he didn't request a TO like he had instructed him to do. He said he DID...then the coach looked at me like he was hurt.
After the game, the coach was very polite but he did ask me why I didn't grant that TO after the made FT. I told him he would have had to ask again "at the appropriate time". As I was saying it, I felt like an "irritant a$$hole" (or whatever Dan said)...the coach bought it...but, I made up my mind then, that if I was going to be an "irritant a$$hole", to save it for something a whole lot better than that situation. :D

BTW...maybe it is regional...but I see a lot of officials granting TO's after "mades" without any eye contact. In other words, without taking their eyes off the court. Maybe NFHS would fire us all...:cool:

My experience has been that a quick glance will usually confirm the TO. However, there have been games I have been involved in, where a coach makes their request for a TO prior to the make of the FT, then turns and begins some prep work (erasing the markerboard, looking for a marker, calling for subs) for the TO. I acknowledged the coach's request and granted the TO per the request. To some degree it is a professional courtesy. I can only imagine how the rest of the game would go with this coach if I went letter of the law in this TO situation.

If for some reason the coach changes their mind, then just put the ball in play with the required provisions after a made FT, no big deal as the situation doesn't change, it is still a made FT. In future dealings with that coach, I would have the coach request it visually/orally.

If something other than a made FT happens, I just ask the coach if they still want the TO if they have possession of the ball. Never had a problem handling things this way.

In the end do what feels most comfortable and what works for you.

That's the best you can do, pick a word out you don't like, rather than address the comparison? :confused:

ReallY? I've just looked through every post that you written in this thread and I don't see this statement anywhere. :)

THANK YOU! So what's wrong with doing the same thing with the FT situation? :p

No sir! different situation now.

Sir! I would like to thank you for your continuing interest in my development. You are correct, the request must be made again. Once again thank you.

It loses its value?

You're obviously not reading my posts. I posted twice exactly when I'll do this. I also posted when I do not do this & exactly why.

Go back, reread the thread, & try again. You can do much better than this.

To quote a famous curmudgeon:

You got a rule citation to back that up? ;)

99% of the time (ok, I may even be convinced to go up to 99.3%), I agree it won't hurt. I'm just paranoid enough to worry about that 1 time where something happens and I don't have a rule to back me up. So why not just ask for that verification just to CYA?

You need to reread the thread too.

Yep. Picked it up at WalMart this morning.

:cool: Well, let's see. Here' s your first post.

Second post.

Third post.

Fourth post.

At which point I asked "LOL! That's my point. At what point do you allow a coach to request a TO for later and at one point do you draw the line?"

Fifth post.

Sixth post.

Sorry my friend, but nowhere in those first 5 posts do you address my question. I'm addressing the principle of requesting of TO in advance. You'll do it on a FT but not at other times? How about duyring a loose ball? How is that different?:cool:

I'm done, before I make you mad. :)

I've given my position.

You just don't accept it.

No problem, I'll live.

:shrug:

I did. And yes, the rule is not worded clearly on whether the request shall be made at the appropriate time, or the request shall be granted at the appropriate time.

I guess if I have to choose between the remote possibility of the coach changing his mind and the following mess, or the remote possibility of a coach thinking I'm an irritant because I asked for him to verify the request, I'll be the irritant. The mess would be my problem, his feeling I'm an irritant would be his problem. WTH, I'm already an irritant, right?

That's all we need to agree on.

Everything else is irritating bullsh1t.

Hey, I'm just practicing for my trip.

Am I doing good at being an irritating tourist?

I accept your position, no matter how wrong it is. :D

I just didn't realize we weren't allowed to discuss it. :cool:

sigh....

when did I say that?

(I fell like I need to ask "Hey coach? We looking at the same game? Cause we sure aint seeing the same game.")

Not it is not.

Peace

Back To Fashion Police
 

Basketball Forum Members:

I appreciate all the lively discussion regarding the coach calling a time out from the bench, a rule change that occurred several years ago. Can we please get back to a discussion about officials being asked more and more to become "fashion police", as directed by the NFHS in rule changes for the upcoming season?

Nope. I find that much more boring than the current discussion. Sorry.

Has it occurred to you that we aren't as concerned as you are with what you term the "fashion police rule?

If you don't like the rule, ignore it.

Great! We can continue to discuss it. Then please explain why you would grant a timeout in one situation and not in another.

SITUATION 1 - During the first of two FTs, Coach A asks Dan_ref for a timeout after the second FT, if it is made. There is no team control or player control and the ball is live when the request is made.

SITUATION 2 - While the ball is rolling around on the floor, Coach A asks Dan_ref for a timeout, if one of his players gets the ball. There is no team control or player control and the ball is live when the request is made.

Hey BillyMac, you could always delete your original post. That would end the discussion real quick-like.