NEW Case Book ruling!!!

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

2006-2007 Version:
*5.12.4 SITUATION B: Regulation play ends with a tied score. Team A has used all of its allotted time-outs. Team A requests a time-out before the overtime period begins. RULING: The time-out should not be granted.

Ok, it shouldn't be granted. But what if you do grant it? What if you have a brain cramp, blow the whistle, announce "Time-out, blue", report it to the table, and then your partner comes over and tells you that you "shouldn't" grant the time-out?

Do you still follow the old case, since you've granted the time-out? Or do you go and tell everyone that there is no time-out?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Ok, it shouldn't be granted. But what if you do grant it? What if you have a brain cramp, blow the whistle, announce "Time-out, blue", report it to the table, and then your partner comes over and tells you that you "shouldn't" grant the time-out?

Do you still follow the old case, since you've granted the time-out? Or do you go and tell everyone that there is no time-out?

I honestly have no idea. Furthermore, I don't even know if this would apply to that situation:
5.8.3 SITUATION E: The official erroneously grants Team B a time-out in a situation when Team B cannot have one. What happens now? RULING: Team B is entitled to use the time-out since it was granted. The time-out once granted cannot be revoked and is charged to Team B. All privileges and rights permitted during a charged time-out are available to both teams.