T'd up

[soclueless]

I pulled a bonehead move Saturday. Called for a timeout when not in possesion of the ball. I was given the TO and assessed a technical. I had TO's available so that wasn't the issue. From what I can see in the book (5-8-3), I should not have been awarded the TO, and no T should have been assessed. Do I have this right?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by soclueless

I pulled a bonehead move Saturday. Called for a timeout when not in possesion of the ball. I was given the TO and assessed a technical. I had TO's available so that wasn't the issue. From what I can see in the book (5-8-3), I should not have been awarded the TO, and no T should have been assessed. Do I have this right?

No 'T' should have been assessed. Whether or not you should still have been granted a TO depends on which rule set you were using.

[kbilla]

once the TO is granted you get it regardless of whether it should have been granted or not...there is no "T" in this case in any event..

[Junker]

What level of basketball are we talking about here? I agree that you should not have gotten the T for this one. The official should have ignored your request, however once they grant the time out, they have to eat it and go explain to the other coach why they granted a TO to you when you didn't have the ball.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by soclueless

I pulled a bonehead move Saturday. Called for a timeout when not in possesion of the ball. I was given the TO and assessed a technical. I had TO's available so that wasn't the issue. From what I can see in the book (5-8-3), I should not have been awarded the TO, and no T should have been assessed. Do I have this right?

Partially.

There shouldn't have been a technical foul issued. Once granted, you're going to be charged with the timeout and you can take it. Case book play 5.8.3SitE.

[soclueless]

NFHS. Our rec league (7/8 grade boys) uses CA High School rules which are "CIF" but they deffer to NFHS.

[Ref Daddy]

A referee can call an "inadvertant whistle" and resume play.

I trust your response, rection was professional during this event and did not make the T an option?

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by Ref Daddy

A referee can call an "inadvertant whistle" and resume play.

Once you blow the inadvertant whistle though, the ball is dead, so he's entitled to a TO then.

EDIT: Entitled isn't really the word, but there's no reason now to not grant his request.

[CaliOne]

but if i did say it was an inadvertent whistle, I would still not let him have the time-out, and quickly put the ball back in play.. Not basing this on any rule, just probably what I'd do.

[Ray_from_Mi]

The only way I think you can receive the T along with the TO is issue the TO, the table will then tell you that team has no TO's to give, so you then give the T as well as the TO.

[mplagrow]

Originally Posted by Ray_from_Mi

The only way I think you can receive the T along with the TO is issue the TO, the table will then tell you that team has no TO's to give, so you then give the T as well as the TO.

"Seeing as the VP is such a VIP, shouldn't we keep the PC on the QT? Because if it leaks to the VC, he could end up an MIA, and then we'd all be put on KP."

Got that movie?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by CaliOne

but if i did say it was an inadvertent whistle, I would still not let him have the time-out, and quickly put the ball back in play.. Not basing this on any rule, just probably what I'd do.

The problem is it runs counter to the NFHS desire on this. Once you blow it dead, B gets their TO.

[j51969]

Seems like the bonehead was the official that blew the play dead. The T on top of it was completely stupid. Basically he's giving you a T for his mistake. I hope someone straightens him out.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by mplagrow

Got that movie?

Too easy!!!



Goooooooood Morning, Vietnaaaaaaaaaaaam!!!!!