Correctable error

[Gimlet25id]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And what rule(s) are you going to cite to the offended coach rather than citing the correctable error rule? Ones that aren't applicable to the actual circumstances?

If you can logically explain a call citing existing rules, imo you never have to "sell" anything to anybody. The call sells itself.

Of course, the coach probably will not believe you anyway because he doesn't want to believe you.

Hoping that I wouldn't have to explain a rule. If I can make a valid argument that the ball was already dead befor ethe rebound was possessed.

Do coach's ever believe anything we say...somebody has to be responsible for them losing the game...it sure wasn't them.

[Red_Killian]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I agree with Jurassic. Especially since the administering ref announced 1-and-1. I think it has to be called a correctable error. and the ball gets put back into play at the POI.

Now.

What if T realizes as the shot goes up that L announced incorrectly? Blows whistle before the ball shanks off the rim? NOW it's still early enough that the correctable error rule doesn't apply, I think.

Good thread, I agree with Rainmaker, who agrees with Jurassic, therefore I agree with Jurrasic and all the reasons he has posted. As Rainmaker says, if the T gets the whistle BEFORE the rebound, better yet as he hears the incorrect information and BEFORE the free thrower shoots then we're OK. If the whistle doesn't come until AFTER the rebound and both teams attempted to rebound then it is correctable error and POI.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id

Hoping that I wouldn't have to explain a rule. If I can make a valid argument that the ball was already dead befor ethe rebound was possessed.

Do coach's ever believe anything we say...somebody has to be responsible for them losing the game...it sure wasn't them.

Gimlet, the point is, there is one proper way to handle this situation. If you don't know the way to handle it, and you do it incorrectly, that's one thing. But you are being told the correct way, and you're arguing against it. Whatever valid argument you have, it doesn't matter. The way to correct this error is prescribed and your arguments are meaningless. Whether or not coaches ever believe anything you say doesn't matter. You need to be right. And if you are told what's right, and then you don't do it, it doesn't matter what the coach thinks, because you'll be wrong. You can plan on dealing with know-nothing, over-emotional coaches for the rest of your career, because the coaches who know and who expect proper rules won't want you doing their games, unless you use proper rules. It's just that simple.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And what rule made the ball dead before the official blew his whistle?

The rule which states that you get 2 free throws after the 10th foul.

[just another ref]

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
The case book play which dealt with the opposite of this situation points out that action was necessary because the misinformation put someone at a disadvantage. In this case that is not true.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Not giving A1 his second merited FT wasn't putting him at a disadvantage?

That's the whole point I am trying to make. The lead blew his whistle, stopped the play, and immediately awarded him the second free throw.
Is it written somewhere that the one official giving erroneous information carries more weight than the real situation which is properly covered by the other official?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The rule which states that you get 2 free throws after the 10th foul.

And what do we call the rule that we use if we fail to give one of those 2 free throws that are due for a 10th. foul?

[just another ref]

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
The rule which states that you get 2 free throws after the 10th foul.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And what do we call the rule that we use if we fail to give one of those 2 free throws that are due for a 10th. foul?

Which thread have you been reading. They DIDN'T fail to give the second free throw. If they had, everything you say would apply, but nothing significant happened as a result of the wrong information.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Quote:
Which thread have you been reading. They DIDN'T fail to give the second free throw. If they had, everything you say would apply, but nothing significant happened as a result of the wrong information.

Are you serious? If they didn't fail to give the second FT, then why did they have to go back and give it then?

JAR, please cite some rules that might back up your position. There's been none cited to date in this thread that have done so that I can see.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Are you serious? If they didn't fail to give the second FT, then why did they have to go back and give it then?

JAR, please cite some rules that might back up your position. There's been none cited to date in this thread that have done so that I can see.

I simply think that you are looking for a rule where none is necessary. Trail said 1 & 1 before the shot. Lead said no, it's 2 immediately after the shot. Nothing significant happened in between. Where is the rule which says that T's wrong information takes precedence over L's correct information.

[Adam]

All the players played as if there was a one-and-one. B gets the rebound, then the trail official comes in and states that there's a 2nd shot. Possession has changed, the ball has become live. B earned a rebound. If you just pretend it didn't happen, you're taking a rebound away from B. Oddly enough, the rules cover it quite well. Go with the rule as it's written. I'd rather explain this to a coach who doesn't understand the rule than explain doing it the other way to a coach who does know the rule.

[Nevadaref]

People, why are you arguing about this? It is right there in the Case Book.


2.10.1 SITUATION B: A1 has been awarded two free throws. Erroneously, the ball is allowed to remain in play after A1 misses on the first attempt. A2 rebounds the miss and tosses the ball through the basket. B1 secures the ball and inbounds it. Play continues until a foul is called on A2 as B is passing the ball in B's frontcourt. RULING: The goal by A2 counts, but the error of not awarding A1 a second free throw is no longer correctable. Since the ball remained in play on the missed free throw, the clock started and the ball became dead when the goal was scored. When the ball became live on the subsequent throw-in, the time period for correction had expired.

[lukealex]

2.10.1 SITUATION B does fit this scenerio, but for the people who aren't agreeing that I was wrong and should have went the correctable error way, it is too much action after the error.

The calling official, in this case the R, announced 1 and 1, administered the first throw, which was missed, B1 rebounded. The ball is live when A1 has it for the free throw, 6-6. I could have blown it dead then and kept the players on the line for 2 shots, but I didn't. Again, once B1 secured the rebound, this is now ONLY correcable error territory.

I would recommend explaining the rules to coaches, even if they don't know the rules or believe you, at least you aren't making up rules. We aren't there to give team A a chance for the rebound after the second shot, we are there to be sure the game is played by the rules set down by the FED

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by lukealex

2.10.1 SITUATION B does fit this scenerio, but for the people who aren't agreeing that I was wrong and should have went the correctable error way, it is too much action after the error.

The Case Book ruling proves that the ball becomes live and does NOT remain dead, as many posters in this thread have contended, even though 2 FTs should have been awarded. JR has been correct all the way.

I really miss Mr. Annoying Grammar Guy.

[just another ref]

After the first free throw, B1 jumped up and secured the rebound. If play had been allowed to continue, we would have been looking at a correctable error situation, whether the official had given erroneous information or not. Therefore, as I see it, the bad information given by the ref is not even important. Play was not allowed to continue. B1 grabbed the rebound, and the play was immediately whistled dead. This happens all the time. Nobody was put at a disadvantage.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

After the first free throw, B1 jumped up and secured the rebound. If play had been allowed to continue, we would have been looking at a correctable error situation, whether the official had given erroneous information or not. Therefore, as I see it, the bad information given by the ref is not even important. Play was not allowed to continue. B1 grabbed the rebound, and the play was immediately whistled dead. This happens all the time. Nobody was put at a disadvantage.

For exactly how long? Do you believe that there is some kind of timeframe here? Did you even bother to read the Case Book play that I just posted? What you are advocating is clearly contrary to that.

What do you call B1 rebounding the ball? Isn't that play?