resumption of play
 

Hello guys. I was reviewing the NFHS exam and a particular question is continually coming up for discussion at our local district meetings. It is #49 -----> The resumption of play procedure is only in effect following a charged time out or intermission. I understand the resumption of play procedure but if you have a situation where team A request a time out for a correctable error and it is still correctable, then team A is not going to be charged with a time out. Thus we will put the ball back into play and may utilize the resumption of play procedure if there is an unusual delay. Therefore I would answer that question as FALSE. Any information or help with this situation will be aprreciated. Thanks

You're splitting hairs. Answer false if you like. It will be graded as incorrect.

#49 True 7-5-1; 8-1-2

The correct answer is TRUE.

Rules 7-5-1, 8-1-2 and 10-1-5(b) specifically say that the resumption of play procedures only apply to two situations- delays following a charged time out or intermission. There are no other situations listed in the rules, including the one that you detailed above, that are listed as also being eligible for the resumption-of-play procedures.

In the situation that you listed- i.e. a team failing to be ready after any official's time-out, then rule 10-1-5(b) is used. There is no warning given because the circumstances are not one of the two situations listed as being eligible for delay-of-game procedures. Iow, because it's <b>not</b> after a time-out or intermission, it's an immediate team technical foul charged to team A, with no warning, for delaying the game by preventing the ball from being put into play.

Btw, the FED-issued answer sheet for the Part I exam also lists the correct answer for #49 as being TRUE.

If a team <b>is</b> charged with a time-out after a correctable-error conference, the "resuming play" procedure after the time-out is still not used because it doesn't meet the criteria of rule 7-4-4, as listed as being necessary in 7-5-1.

Just thought I'd throw that one in before you thought of it too.:)

JR. Thanks for the help. If you or anyone else has a copy of the answers, I would appreciate a copy for myself. They can be emailed or I can give a fax #

Palmetto, personally I'd cut my own nuts off before I'd send out the exam answers to anyone before every state in the country had finished writing the exam. There's just too much of a chance that the answers could get out to other officials who haven't written the exam yet.

You're doing the absolute best thing right now that you possibly do imo. You're asking about individual questions, and you're getting feedback and also sparking a good discussion about a particular play. That's how we learn, not by just getting exam answers. Jmo as always.

Welcome to the forum.

I think the reference to 7-4-4 in 7-5-1 is incorrect. If it were correct, then a TO called while neither team was in control (e.g., a TO called immediately after a basket) would not result in the Resumption of Play procedure being used.

JR. Then based on the information in 7-4-4, a correctable error would be considered an "infraction" thus it would disqualify this situation from utilizing the ROP procedure? I'm just trying to get a good grasp on ROP.

our state does not use the fed exam. we only use it as a refresher tool and to get us in the right frame of mind when we do take our exam. I wouldn't want any answers for any reason other than to review how I have answered the exam and to share with our officials within our district.

Now that's dedication to a cause. :D

It's also rhetorical.

I ain't <b>that</b> dedicated, JAR.:D

Then the question would be.....

If team A <b>was</b> charged with a TO after wrongfully asking to have a correctable error looked at, would the "resumption of play" procedure as listed in 7-5-1 now apply if team A <b>was</b> in control when the play was stopped to check out if there was actually an error?

Iow, would the "resumption of play" procedure only apply under the specific circumstances listed in 7-4-4 after a TO charged to a team for a denied correctable error?

I admit that I get lost among all the cross-references. I can't even seem to find the location of a throw-in when the ball becomes dead when neither team is in control (e.g., a TO after a basket, or an accidental whistle with no team control).

That said, I think the Resumption of Play procedure applies whenever there is a TO or an intermission.

Rule 4-36-1 & 2(c)

I'm sorry -- I should have specified that I can't find in rule 7-5 where the throwin is after a TO or accidental whistle....

7-5-9 talks about most of the times when POI is used, but not all.

Not to be argumentative, but to ask a legitimate question.

7-5-1 does not make a distinction between a charged time-out v a non charged time-out. It simply says, "After a time-out (as in 7-4-4)" which says "The ball becomes dead while a team is in control, provided no infraction or the end of a period is involved, as in 7-5-4."

So why does the resumption of play not apply to the original sitch of a non charged time-out do to a correction of an error?

See rule 8-1-2. It talks about the timer having to sound the authorized warning horn and final signal during the time-out that was preceded by the resuming play procedure. Warning horns and final signals are <b>only</b> used for <b>charged</b> TO's as per rule 2-12-4. There are no warning horns and final signals used during other types of time-outs, such as the one used for a correctable error. Ergo...the resuming play procedure is only used after charged time-outs.

Thank you.

When you say there are no other situations listed that are eligble for the resumption of play procedure, what about after a violation? Casebook7.5.2 Sit A says to put the ball on the floor after a violation, if there isn't someone ready to promptly make the ball live. It's not called resumption of play procedure, but it's the same set of actions.

It might be the same set of actions but it doesn't carry the same consequences. In 7.5.2SitA, the penalty is a violation. There is no provision under 7-5-2 for an official warning to be given to a team after a subsequent repeat violation, as the resumption of play procedure in 8-1-2 carries. If the situation ever came up where there might be multiple violations by the same team, then the penalty if you chose to call it would be an immediate "T" for delaying the game by preventing the ball being put in play under R10-1-5b.

Good question.

Another way to look at it is, the coach did not request, nor was he granted a time-out. The charged time out is a penelty for being wrong on the correctable error. He does not get to use a time-out, and there is no "timed" time-out. Therefore no resumption of play.

I think you have this backwards. The coach requests a TO to correct the error. See 10-5-2. IF the error is corrected, then no TO is charged.

If the determination that there is no error is made before the end of the TO, then the coach gets to use the remaining time as a TO. See 5.8.4A

I don't understand 7-5-1 c. or d.

Can you explain what situation this is referring to:confused:

Because then the RPP would apply after every whistle. (And yes, I have a rule citation to back that up. :) )

New case book play 7.5.1 has the explanation.

Thanks. I get my new case book next week. I'll take a look.

Well, in that case.....:)

<b>CASE PLAY 7.5.1 SITUATION: THROW-IN DELAY FOLLOWING TIME-OUT</b>
The administering official has reached a five-second throw-in count on team A after placing the ball on the floor when A was not ready to play following a time-out. What happens next?
<b>RULING:</b> The violation is administered and the ball is made available to team B for a throw-in, at the same spot. If a team B player is not in position, the same procedure is followed. <font color = red>If both teams have violated, a technical foul will be assessed for any further delay by either team. Team A must now have a thrower available, plus all other players on the court and team B must must be on the court ready to play also. If either or both teams are not in compliance immediately, a technical foul shall be charged.</font>
<b>COMMENT:</b> Each different time a team has delayed returning to the court after a time-out or between quarters, the resumption-of-play procedure should be used. However, if a team refuses to play after technical fouls have been assessed, the game may be forfeited. (5-4-1)

Hope that helps, Kajun.

Thank you.