Grant the timeout or not?

[SamIAm]

...and when an airborne player, who might land OOB, has control of the ball and their teammate requests timeout. Grant it or not? (NCAA)

Edit to add "(NCAA)".

[Snake~eyes]

NFHS: Yes

NCAA: Maybe.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snake~eyes

NFHS: Yes

NCAA: Maybe.

This is the exact wording about the NCAA rule in the front of the rulebook about changes.

Originally Posted by NCAA

Old Rule 5-9.3.a, 5-10.1.a, new pages 113 and 115. A timeout shall not be
recognized when an airborne player’s momentum carries him either out-ofbounds
or into the backcourt.

Peace

[SamIAm]

Thanks JRut.. I should have checked on my own first. I forgot I had the 2007 NCAA rules bookmarked.

Shouldn't the rule also include verbiage about the airborne player also havinging control of the ball. The way the rule reads, you should not grant a timeout if there is an airborne player who might land OOB or in the backcourt (ball control not mentioned).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

Thanks JRut.. I should have checked on my own first. I forgot I had the 2007 NCAA rules bookmarked.

Shouldn't the rule also include verbiage about the airborne player also havinging control of the ball. The way the rule reads, you should not grant a timeout if there is an airborne player who might land OOB or in the backcourt (ball control not mentioned).

I think you are reading too much into the statement. What I quoted was not in the actual rules section of the rulebook. This was just a highlight of the new rules. Also it is made clear in all the interpretations that control of the ball does not change as it relates to calling a timeout. They just changed the rule to basically mimic the NBA rule and to disallow an airborne player to ask for a timeout.

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

Shouldn't the rule also include verbiage about the airborne player also havinging control of the ball. The way the rule reads, you should not grant a timeout if there is an airborne player who might land OOB or in the backcourt (ball control not mentioned).

Sam, if there's no player control in that sitch, you're not granting the TO anyway.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

Sam, if there's no player control in that sitch, you're not granting the TO anyway.

Hmmm....A1, located at around the FT line, is holding the ball. A2 jumps out of bounds and while in mid air requests a time out.

You...

1. Grant time out
2. Do not grant tme out
3. Wonder what this fool is doing
4. Wonder why this stupid stuff always happens to you.

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think you are reading too much into the statement. What I quoted was not in the actual rules section of the rulebook. This was just a highlight of the new rules. Also it is made clear in all the interpretations that control of the ball does not change as it relates to calling a timeout. They just changed the rule to basically mimic the NBA rule and to disallow an airborne player to ask for a timeout.

Peace

You may not have known it, but you did quote the actual rule. Page BR-115.

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Hmmm....A1, located at around the FT line, is holding the ball. A2 jumps out of bounds and while in mid air requests a time out.

Gotcha. I misunderstood his point. You're only going to deny the request if the airborne player is the one in control of the ball.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Hmmm....A1, located at around the FT line, is holding the ball. A2 jumps out of bounds and while in mid air requests a time out.

You...

1. Grant time out
2. Do not grant tme out
3. Wonder what this fool is doing
4. Wonder why this stupid stuff always happens to you.

5. All of the above?

Good question. But I would actually answer 1, 3, and 4. The reasoning behind the new rule has to do with officials missing whether the airborne player might've already been OOB by stepping on the line before saving the ball, and thus missing the violation before granting the TO. In your case, there is no "saving the ball", so any teammate can request the TO. As far as I know, there is no restriction on a player needing to be inbounds to request the TO, unless there's "unauthorized leaving" involved. The coach can also be OOB and request the TO as well, right?

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Hmmm....A1, located at around the FT line, is holding the ball. A2 jumps out of bounds and while in mid air requests a time out.

You...

1. Grant time out
2. Do not grant tme out
3. Wonder what this fool is doing
4. Wonder why this stupid stuff always happens to you.

I will improve your sitch a little (imo) -

A1 near the mid court line, defending. A1 steals a pass, then requests timeout. Do grant the TO without checking the location off A2-A5 (one might be jumping near OOB or the mid court line) or do you grant the timeout. I know what to do logically, but according to the rule you cannot grant the timeout if an airborne player might land OOB or in BC.

Which brings me back to an earlier point. The rule should include verbiage about ball control.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

You may not have known it, but you did quote the actual rule. Page BR-115.

Well it is part of the rule. Other aspects of not granting a timeout do apply as well. My point is that there have been interpretations making it clear to not make a lot of exceptions to this rule based on some case plays that were discussed at the meeting and are available through the NCAA Men's Committee. The part I quoted is actually word for word of that section, but there are other aspects to the rule.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Hmmm....A1, located at around the FT line, is holding the ball. A2 jumps out of bounds and while in mid air requests a time out.

You...

1. Grant time out
2. Do not grant tme out
3. Wonder what this fool is doing
4. Wonder why this stupid stuff always happens to you.

5. Wonder how Dan has the time to think of all these smart-a$$ responses...

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

5. Wonder how Dan has the time to think of all these smart-a$$ responses...

That's not very nice...you better watch yourself or I'll get a mod to take Chuck's dog over to your house and pee on you.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

That's not very nice...you better watch yourself or I'll get a mod to take Chuck's dog over to your house and pee on you.

Bring it, pal...my ferocious golden retriever will defend me to the death!! Or maybe she'll just run in circles chasing her own tail - it's always a toss-up with her...

And just so we stay on-topic, I'm probably turning to the player who just jumped oob screaming for the time-out, while the ball is in teammates hand at the free throw line, and saying "Yeah, that's gonna look good on the film."