If you follow the rules, you sureasheck will have to penalize a team for a scorer's mistake in this particular instance. You give them the TO and you also give them the technical foul that goes with it.

Terrible advice. You have no rules justification <b>NOT</b> to issue a technical foul in this situation.

Didn't you read about what happened to the officials in the Big Sky that wanted to be Mr. Nice Guy and not follow the rules too?

It's a scorekeeper error that is not correctable, by rule. You've got it backwards. If you <b>didn't</b> follow the rules and issue a "T" in this situation, you wouldn't be working very long.

Thanks ...
 

Nevadaref: Thanks. Are there any other times, other than the correctable error mentioned in the casebook situation above, when a coach may legally come to the table, for example, to correct an incorrect alternating possession arrow?

Case Book
 

Jurassic,
Could you cite a case book play that states that this is not correctable?
Couldn't this fall under the elasticity clause?
In the case in the book about issuing false information as to the # of shots, it's a do over with no penalty to either team.
Have you ever granted a timeout incorrectly thinking you heard the coach request it?
Would you assess a technical if he didn't have any?
I have seen the situation above happen before and asked about it at camp.
Every assignor there said to get the team out of the huddle and resume from the point of interruption since they were clearly given false info by the scorer.

Can you cite a rule that says it is correctable?

You're missing the whole point.The scorer did <b>NOT</b> make an error <i>per se</i>. The team actually took 6 TO's. The scorer had 6 TO's in the official score book. Can you show me where there is any error to correct in that situation?

What you and your assignors are advocating is having the scorer <b>MAKE</b> a book error, not <b>CORRECT</b> a book error. You want them to put the <b>WRONG</b> number of TO's in the book---> 5.

I hope that all of those assignors that told you ignore the rules and make up your own never work in the Big Sky Conference. They don't take kindly there to officials who don't follow the rules. Come to think of it, I can't think of any conference anywhere that would let you away with over-riding the rule book just because you didn't think it was right.

Yes, the scorer gave out wrong information. That doesn't alter the <b>fact</b> that the scorebook was completely correct in the number of TO's taken by that team.

Is it a bad situation? Sureasheck is! As an official, can you do anything about it under the rules? No!

Straight from the rules book, my man:

10-5-2 . . . The head coach may request a time-out or signal his/her players to request a time-out, while within the confines of the coaching box. The head coach may also confer with personnel at scorer's table to request a 60-second time-out (or one 30-second time-out if that is the only type of time-out remaining) for a correctable error as in 2-10, or to prevent or rectify a timing or scoring mistake or alternating possession mistake.

Thanks ...
 

Nevadaref: Thanks. New officials should take note of your post. I knew that coaches weren't supposed to go to the table to get information about timeouts, personal fouls, team fouls, etc, and I also knew that they were allowed limited access to the table for a few things, and your post certainly makes the limitations very clear.

I think we are all under the assumption this means two minutes remaining in the forth quarter not overtime. Right?

Obviously, if OT then 6 time-outs are alloted.

6 timeouts
 

I never said anything about 6 timeouts. I mentioned that the advice was to get the teams back out and don't record the timeout. Still only 5 timeouts have been recorded.

Same thing. You're advocating not recording a TO that you have already granted. You have absolutely no rules backing to do so.

Remember the Chris Webber Michigan sixth TO in an NCAA championship game? What do you think would have happened to the careers of the officials on that game if they hadda followed your advice and said "OK, we'll ignore the call"?

Not very good advice, socal, not at all.

Jurassic
 

One question you didn't answer: If you grant a timeout to a coach that has none remaining and he/she says he didn't call it, are you issuing a technical foul, since according to your logic, the timeout has already been granted?

That situation has nothing to do with this one. They were informed they had zero timeouts and they knew it. If I'm coaching and I send my statistician to the scorer to confirm timeouts remaining and they say I got one, I should feel justified in calling one. Also, the scorer failed to fulfill his duties in informing the head coach through the officials that he had zero remaining.

That question has absolutely nothing to do with what we're discussing. It's not relevant in any way. In the play being discussed, there is <b>NO</b> doubt that the TO was requested. That's why I ignored this question.

Having said that, my answer to the above is "it depends".

Bull pucky that situation has nothing to do with this one. In both cases, both teams were granted six TO's. It can't be a scorer's mistake if that actually has happened. It can only be a scorer's mistake if he has got the number of TO's granted <b>wrong</b>. No matter how much you want to ignore that, it is fact. It is also a fact that there is no mechanism in place that will deal with a scorer giving out wrong information. That is a league or a conference problem, not the officials'. Officials have to follow the rules. And if you, as an official, refuse to issue a "T" to a team that has requested and been granted 6 TO's, you are not following the rules as written.

I know the rules dude, we told him, he screwed it up. My only mistake was letting him stay in the game after he went ballistic on us. I won't make that one twice ;)