Correctable error
 

On the 10th foul by team B, A1 is shooting a non-shooting foul. I called the foul, told my partner two shots, but he either missed it, didn't hear, or forgot. Not real important.

Partner calls for a 1 and 1, A1 shoots first shot, misses, B1 rebounds. I blew my whistle immediately and called for a second shot. A1 shoots seconds, makes, B gets ball OOB.

My question is, since after the first shot the ball was live, should I have treated this as a correctable error, cleared the lane, then gave B the ball at POI?

I think as long as you blew the whistle immediately and didn't let play continue, this is not treated as a correctable error. Basically, (IMO) the ball became dead on the miss. The players didn't realize it, but you reminded them.

What rule made the ball become dead on the miss?:confused: The whistle was blown <b>after</b> B1 rebounded.

I would handle it the same way as scrapper1, but by rule you might be right about point of interruption. I'd like to hear some of the people that interpret rules have a go at that one. Keep the good questions coming today. I'm finishing up my standardized testing at school and need something to do between my walks around the room. :D

Ohhh I remember those days! I always wondered what they did in between explaining the directions...now I know. :)

Anyways, I understand where scrapper is coming from, however, I think you have to clear the lane and let A1 shoot his/her second free throw then go POI. If coach B knew the rules, then you let A shoot the second and A got the rebound....oh boy, there'd be a hay day.

Rule 6-7-2-a.

Rick beat me to it, but doesn't the ball become dead when it is to be followed by another FT? That's what the situation was here, right? 2 shot foul, except that the ref said the wrong thing. Ball becomes dead after the first FT. Luke's whistle just reminded everybody that the ball was already dead. No?

In addition, I think you can find some support for what he did in Case 8.6.1. I realize it is the "opposite" situation, but it's also a situation that is more problematic. Even in that case, he should blow the whistle and make the ball dead. I think it must be appropriate in his situation.

I would think since my partner said 1 and 1, the ball wouldn't be dead after the first miss, therefor I should have administered the second free throw with the lane cleared.

While that's one of my favorite all-time rules too, it isn't applicable to this situation. The Lead announced 1/1 and that's what B1 played to. A missed first FT on a 1/1 is live.

Don't forget that nothing was corrected yet until <b>after</b> B1 caught the rebound.

In addition, I think that case play isn't applicable either.

If I know the ball is dead, does it really matter what the rebounder thinks? :confused:

I agree that if we all have a brain cramp and think that the rebound is live, then we have a correctable error. But Luke "immediately" stopped play to remind them that the ball was dead. Doesn't that count for something?

Does the fact that the administering official announces 1 & 1 overshadow the fact that it really is 2 shots? Especially when the other official knows that it is 2 shots and acts accordingly?

Why would you completely discount the applicability of this play? The official announced an incorrect number of free throws. There was a rebound. The official then blew the play dead. I think it is reasonable to infer that this case could apply to this play.

1) What was the problem with this play?
ANSWER: There was a failure to award a merited free throw. Rule 2-10-1.

2) Can the failure to award the merited free throw be corrected.
ANSWER: Yes, if the error is caught no later than during the first dead ball after the clock has started. Rule 2-10-2.

3) Was the error caught in time to be correctable?
ANSWER:Yes.

4) How do you correct the error?
ANSWER: By using rule 2-10-6. You shoot the merited FT and then go to the POI to rectify the error.

5) What was the POI when the error was caught?
ANSWER: The POI was after B1 caught the missed first FT.

How could it be <b>reasonable</b> when it's a <b>different</b> situation?

Exactly what I would have done if I had done it correctly

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.

I'm sorry guys I don't see a problem with the way this was handled. Even though the admin. official announced 1 & 1 the calling official knew it was 2 shots. I'm thinking the best thing to do is blow your whistle and just simply announce 1 more shot with the box filled. This doesn't seem any different then when a official announces 2 shots form the get go and the low blocks forget that it is 2 shots and immediately go in for a rebound. We would just simply remind them of the fact we are shooting 2.

Now if the calling official and the admin. official both said 1 & 1 when it should've been 2 & B rebounds with no whistle and play continues with time coming off the clock then I can see invoking Rule 2-10. In the case the calling official said he hit his whistle immediately. Why not go ahead and line them up and give the other shot?

I keep looking at the case book as I write this post. It sounds like either would work. I guess it all depends when the calling official hit his whistle to stop play. I think whether I go correctable or not would be if time ran off the clock. If no time runs off and my whistle or the whistle is right before or either right @ the rebound being controlled would dictate the ruling. It seems easiest, if you can get by with it, to line them back up and shoot the other throw.

Agreed. 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. Shoot the other free throw and forget it.

I'm leaning towards the correctable error situation now. Otherwise, B is cheated out of a rebound they earned.

There was no rebound to get. Ball was dead, and played as dead by the lead official.

1) According to the original post, the official blew his whistle <b>after</b> B1 had rebounded the missed FT.

2) Why would time running off the clock be a criteria that is needed to have a correctable error on this play?:confused: The clock starting isn't a rules requirement to have any correctable error occur afaik. It's just one of the parameters set up to define the time-limits that correctable errors are governed by.

And what <b>rule</b> made the ball dead before the official blew his whistle?

Why didn't the calling official come in immediately to correct the lead official on the number of free throws?

Did both teams go after the rebound?

I agree that this meets the criteria for a correctable error.

Suppose that the teams were lined back up to shoot the second and A1 doinks it off the rim and A3 rebounds and gets a put back for two points.

Since B got the rebound on the first throw I think you clear the lane and continue from the POI.

<b>Not</b> giving A1 his second merited FT <b>wasn't</b> putting him at a disadvantage? :rolleyes:

The correctable error in this case is failure to award a merited free throw, right? The thing is, we did not fail to award it. We are going to do so right now, immediately following the first. I see immediately as the key to the whole thing, and this was the word the original poster used to describe when he blew the whistle.

The OP said he hit his whistle immediatley. If time didn't run off then you could justify lining the players up because the whistle makes the ball dead and you was hitting the whistle as he was controlling the rebound. In fact a argument could be made that the ball was dead already by Rule 6-7 art.2a when the calling official verbalized 2 shots, especially if the shooter or any other player from the shooting team herd the calling official say 2 shots.

In the play mentioned on the OP one official says 2 shots and the other says 1 & 1. What if the shooting team knew it was 2 shots and didn't attempt to rebound. Would they be put @ a disadvantage if we invoke 2-10 and go POI with B keeping the ball when A didn't have a chance to rebound. I'm not saying you couldn't go correctable. My point is to make sure we give neither team a advantage. So if no time runs off I think it would help justify the ball was dead, line them up and shoot the second.

Trying to think out loud which way would be the best for the aforementioned game

Like I said you could go either way. I would just prefer to kill right away and line them up if I can. I would think that would be a easier sell then to try and explain the correctable error rule to the offended coach.

What if the shooting team is still down 2 points with under a few seconds left and their only hope is to rebound a missed free throw. If we invoke 2-10, let the A team shoot 1 more shot with the box cleared, they have no chance to get the rebound, assuming of course they knew it was 2 shots.

Just seem that it would fit the game better to line them back up and play on...if you can get by with it.

I suppose this situation could have been prevented if the Trail (the calling official) would have confirmed how many shots before the lead bounced the ball to the shooter. This is something I always do. If I'm the lead, I double check with the trail. If I'm the trail, I hold up how many shots we have so when the lead looks over s/he can see and confirm.

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 <b>want</b> 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.

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.

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.

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

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.


That's the whole point I am trying to make. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: 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?

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?:D

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

Are you serious? If they didn't fail to give the second FT, then <b>why</b> did they have to go <b>back</b> 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.

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.

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.

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

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. :)

trying another angle.....
 

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?

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.



Players jump up and rebound the ball after the first free throw all the time. You step in, blow the whistle, say "one more," and they all go "oh, my bad."
According to what you're saying, B1 should jump up and rebound that first missed free throw again next time, because then you'll give him the ball at the end no matter what happens next.

Yes, but they say my bad when the ref actually said 2 throws

And what is wrong with my grammar :D

WOW!!! Man what a post!!! Felt like I was be reprimanded by my Mother.(per Neva)!!!First I wasn't saying that I was correct or that whoever was incorrect. In fact I said that I thought either way would work depending on exactly when the official blew the ball dead. Either as B was getting the ball or after he had secured it. I was writing my thoughts, and to see if there would be another way to handle this Sit. without invoking the correctable error. It was my understanding that is what is good about this open forum.

On the contrary I know how to invoke the correctable area and think that I have a fairly good understanding of the rule. The original OP listed a good question and I was writing some options for the discussion. Enough explaining.

My original thought was that a VALID argument could be made that the ball was already dead....someone asked to list a rule....here it is...Rule 6-7 Art.2"the ball becomes dead, or remains dead when," "It is apparent the free throw will not be successful on a : a. Free throw which is to be followed by another free throw..

If the table said 2 shots , the calling official said 2 shots, and if they are in the 2nd half, so the offensive teams coach hears this and is expecting 2 shots, and maybe most of the A team thats in the box thinks its 2 shots. Then all of the sudden the Admin. official verbalizes 1 & 1 and only the low block B players pick up. Shot, they move and get the rebound. My question to you, if you can maybe keep your composure is....if the table, & calling official both said 2 shots wouldn't this fall under 6-7 Art. 2a. If so, the ball is dead and we simply explain the RULE that the ball was dead because there was supposed to be 2 shots and the ball stays dead after the first throw when a second throw would follow? Just asking...surely your not against a little discussion that gets our brains thinking more in depth into the rule do you? I'm in no way shape or form saying you are wrong. Just wondering if this route would work as well. If it does then all of the players would get the same opportunity to rebound the ball.

If you had read the previous posts you would have realized my little comment about the coaches not believing us was a joke in response to the post JR left. Please don't take what I say out of context. If you really want to try and scold me or somehow lecture me please take the time to read all of my comments not just one or two.

Looking forward to your response.....I want everyone to know that I know my english and grammer both suck! Hopefully you still get the jest of what I was saying.

Better make that mother before you really get her mad. :D

Thanks for the heads up!!!!

Players jump up and rebound the ball after the first free throw all the time. You step in, blow the whistle, say "one more," and they all go "oh, my bad."


Where does it say that it matters why they rebounded the first free throw when another should follow?

You need to use some judgment here. It should be fairly easy to tell if the players were attempting to play the game and the officials were mistaken to let them do so or if the officials knew that the ball was dead despite the actions of the players and the player who rebounded the ball was merely getting it for the official.

In the first case a correctable error has occurred and the officials are obligated to follow the NFHS rules in fixing it.

Agreed. Could the ball be dead? If the table, calling official both verbalized 2 shots.

Unless you were intentionally making a pun, you can add your diction too! :D

jest
1 : an utterance (as a jeer or quip) intended to be taken as mockery or humor
2 a : PRANK b : a ludicrous circumstance or incident
3 a : a frivolous mood or manner [spoken in <SPOKEN jest] b : gaiety and merriment

gist
1 : the ground of a legal action
2 : the main point or part :ESSENCE [the <THE gist of an argument]

No pun, just bad english.

Sure, individual players do this, even when they've been told "two shots." However, the ref with the responsibility for administering the shots said "one shot" (or "one and one.") He told all the players on the lane that it was a live ball on the miss, and they all played accordingly. The ref made an error, and B got the rebound. By rule, you shouldn't take this rebound away from them.

How do we know what they all did? In the original post it says B1 rebounded, nothing more.

You may have pictured a struggle for a rebound between 6 players, I pictured one guy jumping up and grabbing the ball. Either way, if play is stopped immediately, I say that's the end of it.

They all went for the rebound.

bottome line
 

6-7-2-a states: The ball becomes dead when it is apparent the free throw will not be successful on a free throw which is to be followed by another free throw.


This free throw was to be followed by another free throw. At least one official knew this, and handled the play correctly for that situation. No one was put at a disadvantage. No one failed to get a merited free throw.
End of story.

The kicker here is the administering official said 1 and 1, which meant the rebound after the first shot was live, whether or not it should have been. Therefor, I was wrong and should have administered the second with the lane cleared

I suppose that if all of the players went for the rebound @ the same time, ball was rebounded then the whistle, correctable error would be the only way to go.

Perfect example of all partners giving a visual number of shots, with lead waiting to confrim with partners before administarting the throw's. Trail needs to make sure that lead is giving the right info.

Is there anything in the rule book which says that anything the official says has enough weight to override a rule? If so, I may rethink my position. I find nothing in the rule book that even says that an official shall say how many free throws there are. (mechanics manual does) Look at it the other way: Official says 1 & 1, but the players all know better. Ball comes off the rim and bounces on the floor, untouched, for several seconds. Following your line of reasoning, you're now going to clear the lane, shoot the second, and then use the arrow?

I assuming that it was supposed to be a 2 shot foul. If so, then in the scenario you list wouldn't result in a change of possession. If no change of possession happened then you would just simply line the players back up for the second throw and play on. That would be the POI.

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
Is there anything in the rule book which says that anything the official says has enough weight to override a rule? If so, I may rethink my position. I find nothing in the rule book that even says that an official shall say how many free throws there are. (mechanics manual does) Look at it the other way: Official says 1 & 1, but the players all know better. Ball comes off the rim and bounces on the floor, untouched, for several seconds. Following your line of reasoning, you're now going to clear the lane, shoot the second, and then use the arrow?


Touche, bad argument.

The main thing I am looking for is some reference to an officials erroneous information carrying any weight other than when, as in 8.6.1, it clearly put one team at a disadvantage. I don't see how it can be clear who was put at a disadvantage here. Even if everybody went for the rebound, what if A3 knew it was 2 shots and got a late start after he saw that "everybody else was doing it." (I think somebody else suggested this earlier)

I'm not sure you will find a rule that covers officials giving the wrong info. Although then what is covered in Case book 8.6.1. The key to this case play is the ruling on (c)...both teams made a effort to get the rebound. Play is then to continue. So even if the admin. official gave wrong info the play continued.

The original poster gave additional info on this thread saying all players went for the rebound @ the same time. He obviously didn't come in with a whistle as soon as the players went to rebound. he stated that they all went for the rebound then B recovered the rebound. This isn't any different then the case book play other then the # of throws.

Since all players went for the rebound and they all had the same opportunity to get he rebound no ADVANTAGE or DISADVANTAGE existed. So I agree we need to clear the lane and give another free throw and go POI. This is the way the Federation came up with not awarding a merited free throw. Since there was a change of possession you can't take the ball away from B. If you did then that would be disadvantage to the B team.

You are still ignoring the Case Book play (2.10.1SitB) which I posted in post #41. Would you care to tell me why that doesn't apply?

End of story.:rolleyes:

B is put at a disadvantage because you've taken an earned rebound away from them and are potentially making them earn it again; if A gets the rebound of the next miss, you've cheated B. Yes, I'm assuming all 6 players went for the rebound.

consider this situation. 7th team foul, and you don't realize it's a one-and-one. A1's inbound pass gets stolen by B2, whereby you notice the error and blow the play dead immediately. You blow it dead so quick, the clock runs off about a second or so. You gonna line them up and shoot?

I agree with that.

Adam,
The problem with this example is that the official had to administer the throw-in following the 7th team foul. The team didn't just take the ball out of bounds and do it by themselves. This isn't the old FIBA. Therefore, the official clearly DID SOMETHING that was a mistake in your play, whereas in the scenario with the FT the official is an idle bystander (after mistakenly saying 1-and-1). To me that is quite different.

Rather than continue to rehash this matter, I'd recommend to just another ref and gimlet25id that they check out these two old threads. Perhaps something you read there will be to your liking.

http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=24704


http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=24983

While I agree that this play has a specific method to administer, which has been posted already, it would be interesting to see what the NFHS says about the situation.

In 2.10.1 the ball is allowed to remain in play and significant things happen. In this play ball is whistled dead immediately. (original poster's word, not mine)

This is what I've been looking for somebody else to say, that what the ref said is not the determining factor. Let me turn the question around, would the guy in the original post have to blow the ball dead in mid-air for the rebound not to "count?" Immediately is good enough for me, regardless of how long that took, and yes regardless of whether the clock started or not.

This was my point earlier in the thread. One of the officials knows that the ball is dead and blows the whistle immediately. It doesn't matter if the players think it's still live, because the official knows it's dead and makes that fact known "immediately".

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
In 2.10.1 the ball is allowed to remain in play and significant things happen. In this play ball is whistled dead immediately. (original poster's word, not mine)


I knew there was somebody else with me. Careful buddy, there are a lot more of them than there are of us.:)

In the OP, the official clearly makes a mistake by telling the players on the lane that the ball is live on the miss. This carries the same weight as administering a throw in, IMO. The official administering the free throw is responsible for telling the players how many shots are coming. They have nothing more to go by.

Change my alternate situation a bit. Lead official calls a shooting foul, as the trail comes in on the switch, he mistakenly thinks it's a common foul and sets the kids up for a throw-in. The calling official reports the foul, and heads to his spot opposite the table. The kids are lined up for a throw in, but for whatever reason (let's assume the inbounds play somehow looks like a freethrow lineup) doesn't notice the error. On the throw-in, B1 steals the pass. As soon as B1 grabs the ball, the calling official (now trail) blows the ball dead realizing the error.

It's a bit closer to the OP, and I don't think anyone could argue you'd just line them up and shoot the free throws. You have to go Correctable Error because of the change of possession.

[QUOTE]When I first read the OP I thought immediately was just that.The OPoster gave additional info later that said all players went for the rebound then the B team got the rebound then he blew it dead.

I'm thinking @ first immediately was right when the ball came off the rim or right as the B team was controlling the rebound. Immediately in my mind would have been as soon as the official knew it wasn't good and seen the players jocking for a rebound. That didn't happen here. All players went in then a rebound was controlled, even though it doesn't matter if time ran off or not to correct, if time did run off then you know he didn't hit the whistle immediately.

Like I said before if all players went for the rebound then no disadvantage/advantage was given or obtained. Although I would rather tell the coach the ball was already dead and we were just going to line up and shoot another and I will or would do that if it was remotely close...I don't think you can do that here. Significant action took place with most importantly a change of possession.

Up until the OPoster gave new info I was right with you on the fact the ball was dead. After new info I don't think you have any other option but to invoke "correctable error."

Does everybody accept that the ref giving the wrong info is not the determining factor? In the thread about the game winning shot, rainmaker, I believe, said the shot would count whether the ref had said 1 & 1 or two shots.

Some seem to think the fact that "everybody went for the rebound," is very important. I don't see how since frequently not everybody goes for it. A2 has 3 fouls and doesn't want to pick up his 4th. (so why did he get on the line?) B1 is on the left side, the ball bounces off the right side, so he just stands there. A3 and B3 were talking to each other and not paying attention.
Whatever the reason, everybody going for the rebound is not in any way a given, and is certainly not mentioned in the rules.

So picture this: A1 lines up to shoot 2 shots. Administering official properly informs the players verbally and signals with 2 fingers. In spite of this, A1 misses the first shot and all players occupying lane spaces lunge for the rebound. B1 pulls it down. So in this case the only way to avoid a correctable error situation is to blow the whistle during the time between the ball hitting the rim and A1 securing control?

If the players can't trust the ref to give them the proper information, then we lose all authority out there.

All players going for the rebound is relevant because the case book play says it is. The case book play is clear, it says it matters if all the players attempt the rebound. If B gets the rebound before the official blows it dead, it's a correctable error.

I saw this situation happen last week at a game I attended as a spectator.
Official signals 2 shots. Player misses the first. Everybody went for the rebound. Ball got tipped outside the lane, was on the floor, and.................
the buzzer sounded. Everybody stopped and looked at the table, where both guys were holding up 2 fingers. They shot the second free throw without further discussion or incident.