Time OUt - TO ?
 

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.

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. ;)

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....

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

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

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.

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:

That case play said that the official <b>erroneously</b> granted a TO. In the initial post of this thread, MWI said that his partner <b>granted</b> a TO, <b>possibly</b> 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.

Go back and read the original post. The official <b>granted</b> team A a timeout. Granted! He may have <b>granted</b> the TO <b>erroneously</b> 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?

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

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