Penalty for Delay

[Rick Durkee]

Originally Posted by Kajun Ref N Texas

Then why do we have Correctable Errors in the first place?

I think the issue is the time limit to make the ruling. The Correctable error rule addresses limitations on the time limits to assess the penalties or correct an improperly executed penalty.

[Kajun Ref N Texas]

Originally Posted by Rick Durkee

I think the issue is the time limit to make the ruling. The Correctable error rule addresses limitations on the time limits to assess the penalties or correct an improperly executed penalty.

The original situation doesn't specify that the officials did or did not report the delay.

I would agree this is not correctable if the officials did not report the delay to the table. (In essence, a no call)

However, if the officials reported the second delay, this should be a correctable error situation.

If you believe it is not, please explain.

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Kajun Ref N Texas

However, if the officials reported the second delay, this should be a correctable error situation.

If you believe it is not, please explain.

I don't think it's correctable b/c there are no FTs awarded for a warning. If the official had issued the T, then got distracted somehow and forgot to give the FTs, then that's correctable. But the foul was never called. So no FTs were merited.

[Kajun Ref N Texas]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

I don't think it's correctable b/c there are no FTs awarded for a warning. If the official had issued the T, then got distracted somehow and forgot to give the FTs, then that's correctable. But the foul was never called. So no FTs were merited.

Very interesting.

[Kajun Ref N Texas]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

I don't think it's correctable b/c there are no FTs awarded for a warning. If the official had issued the T, then got distracted somehow and forgot to give the FTs, then that's correctable. But the foul was never called. So no FTs were merited.

Just seems wrong to me. You've issued the second warning which should result in free throws and you catch it in time.

I'm sorry but I'm going to 2-10-1: I have an error in a rule being inadvertently set aside that results in the failure to award a merited free throw. I'm shooting free throws.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Kajun Ref N Texas

Just seems wrong to me. You've issued the second warning which should result in free throws and you catch it in time.

I'm sorry but I'm going to 2-10-1: I have an error in a rule being inadvertently set aside that results in the failure to award a merited free throw. I'm shooting free throws.

What if a dribbler gets bumped (hard and what should have been an obvious foul) but you call travelling instead. You give the ball to the other team. As the other team is dribbling the ball, their coach requests a timeout for a correctable error. He questions the possible foul that occured just prior to the travel. You agree that you should have called a foul. Would you even entertain that as a possible correctable error? It's not all that different from what you're suggesting.

[Kajun Ref N Texas]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

What if a dribbler gets bumped (hard and what should have been an obvious foul) but you call travelling instead. You give the ball to the other team. As the other team is dribbling the ball, their coach requests a timeout for a correctable error. He questions the possible foul that occured just prior to the travel. You agree that you should have called a foul. Would you even entertain that as a possible correctable error? It's not all that different from what you're suggesting.

Now we've got Apples and Steak

The official called a warning for delay. It's the second. That's a T with FT's which was inadvertently set aside. That, by rule, is an error made by an official which should be correctable.