Time OUt - TO ?

[deleted]

We had this happen last night. Team A in controf ball. Partner think he hears TO from bench, I know should of seen it, and grants team A TO... When he gets to bench coach said she did not call TO, but was saying POP OUT...Partner then gets teams back on court and we resume play without charging TO.. I told him I thought we needed to grant TO once it is awarded...Thoughts.

Jurassic Referee

Once the official grants it, the team has to take it. Case book play 5.8.3SitE.

Scrapper1

http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=31887

Junker

Jurassic Referee wrote
Once the official grants it, the team has to take it. Case book play 5.8.3SitE.

Exactly. I know of at least one official that has booted this in his career (I'm sitting here smiling sheepishly. 😉

Ref Daddy

Those situations are a nightmare.

A good pregame - and generally more so with female coach's who TEND to have lower vocals - remind them a visible TO signal is really needed.

It amazes me how many sounds drifting around a basketball court sound to me like "time out"!

RushmoreRef

Ref Daddy wrote
Those situations are a nightmare.

A good pregame - and generally more so with female coach's who TEND to have lower vocals - remind them a visible TO signal is really needed.

It amazes me how many sounds drifting around a basketball court sound to me like "time out"!

I did the same this year.....

Coach is setting up a half-court play with his hand in the air and all five fingers extended yelling "5-Out"......

I grand the time out only to recognize my mistake...I compounded it by just inbounding the ball and moving on, I wasn't going to stick him with a TO he didn't want......Told him he needed a new name and signal for that play though....

Rich

MWI wrote
We had this happen last night. Team A in controf ball. Partner think he hears TO from bench, I know should of seen it, and grants team A TO... When he gets to bench coach said she did not call TO, but was saying POP OUT...Partner then gets teams back on court and we resume play without charging TO.. I told him I thought we needed to grant TO once it is awarded...Thoughts.

He didn't ask for a time out -- this situation is far different than a defensive player or coach getting an unwarranted timeout. THEN I'd grant it.

It's an inadvertant whistle, or at least that's how I'm treating it.

jeffpea

Rich Fronheiser wrote
He didn't ask for a time out -- this situation is far different than a defensive player or coach getting an unwarranted timeout. THEN I'd grant it.

It's an inadvertant whistle, or at least that's how I'm treating it.

I agree....I'm not going to force a coach to take a timeout that he did not want OR ask for. Just simply rule inadvertant and move on. It's not a big deal...IMHO

Jurassic Referee

jeffpea wrote
I agree....I'm not going to force a coach to take a timeout that he did not want OR ask for. Just simply rule inadvertant and move on. It's not a big deal...IMHO

It's also not the rule. You're making up your own rule because you don't like the one we are stuck with. That's wrong.

BEAREF

Jurassic Referee wrote
Once the official grants it, the team has to take it. Case book play 5.8.3SitE.

IMO, this casebook play doesn't apply to the situation in the original post. Wouldn't this apply more to when you grant a TO to a request from a coach/player when their team doesn't have any left? I think it this situation I have an inadvertant whistle and resume play at POI.

Splute

Jurassic Referee wrote
Once the official grants it, the team has to take it. Case book play 5.8.3SitE.

In this situation, I read the case being that Team B was requesting a timeout in a situation where they should not be granted one. I read on that once a timeout is granted it can not be revoked, but is it really granted if it was never requested?:rolleyes:

Jurassic Referee

BEAREF wrote
IMO, this casebook play doesn't apply to the situation in the original post. Wouldn't this apply more to when you grant a TO to a request from a coach/player when their team doesn't have any left? I think it this situation I have an inadvertant whistle and resume play at POI.

That case play said that the official erroneously granted a TO. In the initial post of this thread, MWI said that his partner granted a TO, possibly erroneously if you believe the coach. According to the rules though, it doesn't matter whether the coach was actually calling a TO or not. All that matters is that you actually granted the TO. You might not like the ruling(I don't) but if you don't follow it, you're ignoring a definitive case play completely. And making up your own rules.

Jurassic Referee

Splute wrote
In this situation, I read the case being that Team B was requesting a timeout in a situation where they should not be granted one. I read on that once a timeout is granted it can not be revoked, but is it really granted if it was never requested?:rolleyes:

Go back and read the original post. The official granted team A a timeout. Granted! He may have granted the TO erroneously but he did grant the TO.

Splute

Jurassic Referee wrote
Go back and read the original post. The official granted team A a timeout. Granted! He may have granted the TO erroneously but he did grant the TO.

I guess what I am asking about is in case rule 5-8-3E it states that Team B was granted a TO in a situation where the official should not have granted it. In my mind that means the coach requested a TO and was granted a TO, give it erroneously and now must live with it. No question on that. but.....

My question is, if the coach did not actually request a TO, does this situation actually apply?

Jurassic Referee

Splute wrote
My question is, if the coach did not actually request a TO, does this situation actually apply?

Yes, you erroneously granted the TO. Now both you and that coach have to live with it. The case play says that it can't revoked after you grant it.

Again, I personally don't like that ruling. But....it is a ruling.

bob jenkins

Jurassic Referee wrote
Go back and read the original post. The official granted team A a timeout. Granted! He may have granted the TO erroneously but he did grant the TO.

I agree that the case play is different from what is being discussed here.

tmp44

Does the case book situation referenced here also apply to NCAA? I was at a Univ. of Pittsburgh game a few years ago when Ben Howland was still the coach. He always used a play called "One Up." He said this in a game once, and a very very very very well known official, I won't mention names, thought he was asking for a time out and granted it. Howland explained he was calling a play, and the officials gave the ball back to Pitt for a TI at POI w/o charging a time out.

Rich

bob jenkins wrote
I agree that the case play is different from what is being discussed here.

Glad I'm not the only one.

The intent of the word "erroneously," in my opinion, is to refer to the time out that should not be granted when requested, but is.

The coach didn't ask for it. Why should I not treat it as an IW? It *is* an IW!

Jurassic Referee

bob jenkins wrote
I agree that the case play is different from what is being discussed here.

In what way?

mick

Rich Fronheiser wrote
Glad I'm not the only one.

The intent of the word "erroneously," in my opinion, is to refer to the time out that should not be granted when requested, but is.

The coach didn't ask for it. Why should I not treat it as an IW? It *is* an IW!

I'm with you, Rich.