bad to worse
 

College. live ball. Defense request TO and is granted. oops. TO not allowed. Sub at table. No sub can't come in. Lets put ball back in play. oops Not sub but the 5th player. Yes only 4 players on court. Well, can't sub in because not allowed a TO. So, ball back in play i.e. Live ball with 4 defensive players. No it gets worse. The 5th player runs on the court during the live ball. T-foul. My thoughts are the 5th player is not a "SUB". No rule says a 5th player can't come in when a mistake for stopping play for this TO request. Is there a rule for this mess?

I'm not sure if there is a specific ruling at the college level regarding this issue so this is mostly Fed, but once you've stopped play you have a dead ball situation. Although the defense isn't allowed to call a time out during a live ball situation, once the ball becomes dead either team can call a time out. I think the prevailing thought is since the play has already been killed, the time out request can now be honored. As such subs would be allowed. Even if the time out weren't allowed, any subs that had properly reported should be allowed in during any dead ball period. As far as the 5th player issue goes, he isn't a player until he properly enters the game. As such he remains a sub and can't enter until properly beckoned. The question is how was the ball made live with only 4 on the court in the first place?

College Women. I believe there is a difference between Fed and College. As to 4 players on the court. I was told one player left the court and went to the bench.

What's Done is Done
 

Although the defense leagaly can't call a TO, once you grant it you have to award it. Your mistake for acknowledging the TO request, hopefully the other coach understands. In this instance since the TO has to be awarded the 5th player at the table becomes a moot pint as he/she will enter once the TO ends.

Right. And I'll go further - unless we were in the last 59.9 seconds of the second half this sub COULD enter the game under men's & woman's ncaa rules. But even at that point either team can take a TO and then the sub can come in.

(Good play btw, made me open my book :) )

I once had a game in which a time-out was granted and the coach said, "I didn't call for a time-out", and the official declared an inadvertent whistle. I've asked other officials and told this was ok in college, but (obviously) not in high school. Does anybody have a definitive citation for this situation?

That is my understanding also but I cannot find it in the book either. I'm sure someone will come up with it.

We have had several threads on granting T.O.s, especially regarding if they were "actually" requested or not. Below is the Sit from 06-07. By rule when a T.O. is granted it can not be revoked; however, the discussion lies with whether or not it was actually requested for the Ref to grant it.... thus IW has been used in thoses instances... right? wrong?

<TABLE cellSpacing=4 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=nfhsMainFtMdBld vAlign=top noWrap>5.8.3 Situation E:</TD><TD class=nfhsMainFtMd vAlign=top align=left colSpan=4>The official erroneously grants Team B a time-out in a situation when Team B cannot have one. What happens now?</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nfhsMainFtMd vAlign=top align=right>Ruling:</TD><TD class=nfhsMainFtMd align=left colSpan=4>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.</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nfhsMainFtMd vAlign=top noWrap>


</TD><TD class=nfhsMainFtMd vAlign=center noWrap align=left>[See corresponding Rule Article for Situation 5.8.3]</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Yep, good find, but this is the HS rule. Scrappy and I are talking about the ncaa rule.

I thought that was the case. Thought I would post HS in case others were curious too. Sorry.

Which rule for HS covers that? (EDIT: Never mind, I see the rule cited) Is the intent of the rule to make sure that if a player calls timeout it must be taken, regardless of whether the coach wanted it? I hope so. What about a situation like this:

About 5-6 years ago my Frosh team had the ball in the front-court (2nd half, so right in front of me). Action is ocurring, I'm standing in my box, closer to table than baseline, mouth shut and arms folded when the lead official blows his whistle and says "Timeout-red." While waiting in stunned silence to find out which of my players unnecessarily called a timeout, imagine my surprise to have the table be told that I called the timeout. When I explained that I had done no such thing, I was told that "someone around my bench" called for it. I pointed out that since I had no assistant coach and only 3 players on the bench and that none of them said it, I didn't want a timeout and would like to just restart the game. The official told me that since "I heard the timeout call from around your bench, you have to take it."

I decided there was no point in arguing. Aside from the obvious things that are wrong with how that was handled, I can't imagine that the rule is intended to force a timeout on a team in a situation like that.

Thanks for the knowledge!

Had a sitch once like this not too long ago.....

I was T and the ball was being advanced toward half court against mild pressure (by this I mean the guard was about 7-8 feet away moving backwards to play normal D in the FC)....I happened to take my eyes off the dribbler to check/verify the clock (it was under :20 left and I wanted to get a good mental note of where we were at)...As I did this, I hear TIMEOUT-TIMEOUT...I blew the whistle and it was the guard not the ball handler that said it....I called an inadvertandt whistle and we put the ball back in play with a throw in from HC line...

I admit, I should have looked to verify....but the placement of the players really made me think it came from the ball handler...I was probably equidistant from both the guard and the dribbler when I heard it...it really sounded like it came from my right (where the ball handler was at) and not toward my left where the guard was at...

Is there a penalty here for what the defense did?

I am hardly an expert on rules, but I believe the intent relates to the fact that if an Official GRANTS a TO, then it must be enforced. Rather than if one is requested. Where it becomes gray is in situations as you mentioned. The official believes someone called a TO, he granted it, therefore by rule it should be enforced. However, I believe that if the situation, after review, indicates that no TO was actually requested, then there is nothing to GRANT and therefore should be treated as an IW. But again that is judgement and common sense.....

In this case since you blew the whistle to grant the TO, I believe the Defense should be granted & charged with the TO. No it should not have been granted to start with, but since the play was stopped for the TO, it must be granted. The only penalty would be if B team didnt have any TOs remaining.

Clearly, my work is not done here. :(