Question about all these improper TOs
 

Via reading all these post about the improperly granted TO and it has to be used even if Team wasn't supposed to get one. I can see this when team A is on defense and the official grants TO. What if it wasn't really requested, I say that's an inadvertant whistle.

If its not IW, how does one penalize an extra TO? Say Team A used all their TOs, the official thinks Coach A says TO and blows whistle. Now what?

Depending on situation, Coach A could realize he's out of TOs and say, "I was calling a play (five-out,side-out, whatever)" to avoid the T. On the other hand, how can you penalize Coach A for calling a play that sounds like time-out with a T just because he has already used all his time-outs?

Hmmm. Whaddya think? I can see both sides here.

I'm not sure. I make sure that I hear "TIME-OUT!" before I give the time out. They could be saying something else...just like a game tonight.

There was about 30 seconds left in the game. Home team was dribbling down the court...I was table side near division line going past home bench when I hear the coach saying "Time! Time!"

I did nothing..continued down. She kept saying, "Time, Time." I thought she was telling her players to watch the time on the clock. Finally one of her assistants said "Time-out," and I granted it realizing the coach was trying to call time out.

Long story short I guess you have to be sure the time out is what they wanted...then the coach has no recourse if he goes over his limit.

The consensus here (as stated on the other thread) is go with an IW.

More importantly, as NM Ref stated, make sure you know that's what coach wants before you blow your whistle.

When the rule first came in there was a POE directing the officials to verify that it was in fact the HEAD coach making the request. This has been followed up by a clarification that the officials are supposed to focus upon the on-court action first and the coaches have to understand this and it is their responsibility to make it known that they desire a time-out.

Lastly, don't ever grant a time-out because an assistant says "time-out." :(

From his description, NM_Ref didn't. He granted the head coaches request for the TO <b>after</b> the assistant coach clarified that it actually <b>was</b> a timeout request <b>by</b> the head coach. Jmo, but I think that he was absolutely right in the procedure he followed.

your right...normally I wouldn't call a timeout because an assistant requested it. It did just snap in my head that the head coach was requesting time and not referring to what I thought she was.

NM Ref, could you explain this in more detail?

There was a play on A’s side of the court and B knocks it out of bounds, partner signals to A and prepares for throwin. Two girls from A leave the bench and go to scorers table, who immediately buzzes. Girls run out onto court and take there places, without being beckoned (because I didn’t see them.). Almost at the exact same time Coach of A calls timeout. I signal timeout and we take our positions. Scorer calls me to the table and lets me know of the situation. I call partner over and ask him if he saw them come in. He said no, I said it didn’t matter anyway because the scorer and timekeeper both saw and confirmed what happened. My ruling?

I give Team A an administrative technical…but thats it. Thats where I messed up. At half I call a buddy and tell him what happened…he said I was right, but didn’t get it all…the technical should have been indirectly given to the coach and she should have lost her box…I didn’t do that…damnit. After half I go to Coach of A and let her know I administered wrong and T should have gone to her indirectly and she should have lost her bench. She appreciated the honesty and realized that she should have lost her box…oh well…lesson learned.

basically this is what happened.

I was Trail, standing in front of A's bench. Play was opposite me near endline.

B knocks ball out of bounds, as this was happening two of A's players were running to check in at table.

Partner starts to administer throwing, but before he can start it, coach calls timeout. As coach calls timeout, the timekeeper buzzes for the subs. I turn to signal the timeout but the players are already in (I didn't notice though.) I report timeout and we go as normal.

Like 5 seconds into the timeout, scorer calls me over and tells me that right before i reported the timeout, two players from A ran in without being beckoned. The timekeeper confirmed this. I checked with my partner and he didn't see it, but we took their word for it being that they are "officials" as well.

We administered 1 administrative technical for the players illegal entry and gave the ball to B. Where I messed up the call is the T should have indirectly been charged to the coach, causing her to lose her box, which we didn't do.

Don't know if that makes more sense...curious to hear if others think I got it right, or hear the right way to handle that.

Never cared for the rule change that allowed the coach to call a time out. It forces me to look away from the action for a split second to see if they are calling TO or something that sounds like it, or if it's a fan.

Last night during a VG game, I had full court press on, and Team A was trapped in the far corner looking to pass out, but couldn't. I was on my 7 count for the timeline when I heard what I thought was TO. I'm trying to watch for the foul, count, OB, but I had to look away. The coach has the Tech sign up and shouting "time". I blow the whistle and give it to him. When I look back at the play, I notice the ball has been batted away as my whistle goes off.

Here is the Paulster theory on this play. I give the TO when I hear the TO, even though my whistle has not yet blown. There is a time frame from verifying the TO to looking back at the play and blowing the whistle.

I think the rules committee needs to go back to forcing the players to call TO. Verbally or with signal. It was never an issue then......Course you Michigan fans probably disagree since Chris Webber cost you the game. NC fans loved it!

The T's should have been charged directly to each sub, and not as an "administrative" T, nor indirectly to the coach. 10-2-2.

That said, I probably would have ignored it given the circumstances you describe.

Being a new official this isn't so much of an issue for me cause I'm soooo focused on the game that the coach usually said time out twice to get my attention.

Actually, where you messed up was not charging technical fouls to both A players. They're not team technical fouls. There is also no provision to give the head coach an indirect "T". Rule 10-2 and casebook play10.2.1SitA&B.

ugh...well that sucks...lol

I know I messed up...just wasn't sure where. It was a confusing situation. But it shows me I need to slow down and see the entire situation and go from there...

Thanks for the help...

Gotta hand it to you for being willing to share these stories here and on your blog.

why do i bet that you were playing the game on team b's court? it is amazing how the table usually doesn't offer up these helpful tidbits of information if "their" team was the guilty party:confused: