Because the official "allows play to continue", does this imply he/she saw the ball hit the wire and misapplied a rule that says the ball should be dead? And if a rule is misapplied then it is correctable.

Rules citation to back that statement, please.

Did I miss something? When were we given the allowance to go back and fix one of our mistakes? This isn't the football board is it? :D

I am a new official and am trying to understand the subtleties of the rules so please be patient.

I would cite 2-10-1. Officials may correct an error if a rule is inadvertantly set aside and results in:
d. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

The rule I thought the official set aside was 7-1-2d. The ball is out of bounds when it touches or is touched by:

d. The Ceiling, overhead equipment, or supports.

Because the situation says the official "allows play to continue" I thought it meant he/she saw the ball contact the wire and inadvertantly set aside 7-1-2d. Perhaps I am reading too much into the question but why would the official allow play to continue?

Because officials make mistakes.
If you go back and correct errors like this you might as well report the T to the table that you will have to give to one of the coaches.

If we could go back and fix things, we would all be close to perfect! :D

The sitch we're talking about is Bob's scenario, where one official does see A1's shot hit the support, decides it's still in play anyway, and the ball goes through the basket. B's coach calls TO to discuss a correctable error. ehcco gave the appropriate rules references. I would think letting it go, and not cancelling the score, would be more likely to end up with the T. Which rules reference do you use to let it go? Remember, we aren't talking about arguing a judgement call, but an official setting aside a rule (seeing the ball hit the support and calling it in play).

This is what I was thinking as well. Good job referencing the appropriate rules ehcco.

The error didn't "result in erroneously counting...a score." THe error resulted in allowing the ball to stay in play, and that's not correctable. Yes, there was a score, but that wasn't the error. The item you cite refers to things like BI, 3-point shots, and so forth.

Thanks M&M Guy. You said exactly what I was thinking when I asked my question.

Tomegun, I interpreted allow as the official saw the ball hit the wire and knew the ball should be dead but allowed play to continue and then was questioned/caught by the coach for not applying a rule properly. I did not read into the play the official allowed play to continue because of a mistake. That is why I asked if I was reading too much into the question.

BTW, I am good for a few mistakes per game myself. :D

Unfortunately, the appropriate rule cited isn't appropriate. Or relevant. There is no rule extant that will allow an official to go back in time and change a <b>judgment</b> call.

<i>"Gee, now that I think of it, that shoulda been a foul on A77 2 minutes ago. I think that I'll go back and call it".</i>

Don't think so, folks. :)

Don't matter. There's no rule in the book that will allow you to go back and change the non-call.

What ever, I stand by the fact the the correct rule was stated. You have not provided anything to support these do not apply. As Bobs post is I would stand by this interp. Correct or not(I don't care which) I feel It is supportable by the quoted rules citation.

I know you wont agree, but then if anyone disagrees with you, you take issue.

Try 2-10-1 it does say Officials may correct an error if a rule is inadvertantly set aside and results in:
d. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

But was there a score? In order for there to be a score, a live ball must pass through the net. The ball was dead when it the support. Therefore, aren't you erroneously counting a score?

Juulie, I certainly understand what you're saying, and it opens a messy can o' worms. But, in a real-world situation, I'm going to have more problems telling one coach we're still going to count the score even though everyone saw the ball hit the support, rather than telling the first coach we're going to cancel the score because my partner mis-applied the rule.

I absolutely agree - we will <B>never</B> go back and change judgement calls. But, in Bob's scenario, this wasn't a judgement call. The T saw the ball hit the support, and ruled it to be in play. Where's the judgement?