NEW Case Book ruling!!!

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is an unannounced change in one of the Case Book rulings. I do not agree with the new ruling, but here is the change that the NFHS made:

2005-2006 Version:
5.12.4 SITUATION B: Regulation play ends with a tied score. Even though Team A has used all its allowed time-outs, A1 requests a time-out before the overtime period begins. RULING: The time-out is granted and results in a technical foul. The additional 60-second time-out provided for an overtime period cannot be used until the overtime has actually started with the ball becoming live. This overtime begins with the technical-foul free throws by Team B, followed by a division-line throw-in opposite the table. (10-1-7)

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. The additional 60-second time-out provided for each extra period(s) shall not be granted until after the ball has become live to start the extra period(s).

At least they put the asterisk by the case play to note that it was new / changed.

I agree that the "old" case play was better -- from a game management standpoint, though, I would explain to the coach that s/he didn't get the extra TO until the OT started and ask if they still wanted the TO.

[Ignats75]

Time outs in excess of the allotted number may requested and shall be granted during regulation playing time or any extra period at the expense of a technical foul for each.

(italics mine)

One could argue that these words mean that regulation playing time has expired, and that the New period hasn't started.

Plus 5-12-4 says that a time out shall not granted using the new time out until after the overtime period starts.

If you interpret 5-12-2 the way it appears, then the Case Book ruling seems to make sense.

[Nevadaref]

Yeah, I thought of that rationale, but does that mean that a team cannot take a sixth time-out during halftime or the intermission between quarters because that is not DURING REGULATION PLAYING TIME?

How about during a dead ball period? One could interpret that as not DURING playing time!


We already have a rule which states that successive time-outs cannot be granted following the expiration of time in the fourth quarter is it really a big deal if a team takes one? Ironically, we now have the situation in which the team may take one of its five alloted time-outs prior to the extra period, but cannot be charged with a sixth one if they had already used their five? What is the rationale behind that?

[Ignats75]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yeah, I thought of that rationale, but does that mean that a team cannot take a sixth time-out during halftime or the intermission between quarters because that is not DURING REGULATION PLAYING TIME?

How about during a dead ball period? One could interpret that as not DURING playing time!

Sorry I'm so slow to respond. Its Ohio State-Wolverweasel week.

I interpret Playing time to me time on the clock, not live ball/dead ball