No Timeouts - end of the game

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Really? We exercise our personal judgement when the rule is perfectly clear?

We always exercise our personal judgement even if the rule is perfectly clear.

What if the player said, "I DIDN'T CALL A TIME OUT, I said 'sideout'!" If the headcoach request for it, then it's a different case.

Your evaluator would also question your game-awareness. "Chi, you know White doesn't have any more time out, why did you grant it?" Your reply would be, "because I'm the only person in the entire gym that heard it." Not buying it!

Grant the time out if the player says it "loud enough" (now with that you really need to use your judgement) or if he/she signals the time out. Game tape will always back you up if the player signals it, but cannot prove that he said timeout.

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

What if the player said, "I DIDN'T CALL A TIME OUT, I said 'sideout'!"

First, I'll say I know you didn't "call" it you "requested" it & I granted it. If he persists with the stooopid "sideout" tactic, I'd whack him for lying
Now the opposition shoots 4 & possesion the rock.

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

First, I'll say I know you didn't "call" it you "requested" it & I granted it. If he persists with the stooopid "sideout" tactic, I'd whack him for lying
Now the opposition shoots 4 & possesion the rock.

Man you got an ego trip. This might work at the high school level but definitely not at the college level.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

1) We always exercise our personal judgement even if the rule is perfectly clear.

2)Your evaluator would also question your game-awareness. "Chi, you know White doesn't have any more time out, why did you grant it?" Your reply would be, "because I'm the only person in the entire gym that heard it." Not buying it!

1) And if you ignore a perfectly clear rule, then your judgment is faulty.

2) I disagree completely with that statement also. I haven't met an evaluator yet that agrees with that philosophy either. That includes me. If I have an official come up with some lame excuse for not granting an excess TO request, then I gotta tell you that official is going back to middle school games. He just showed me that he doesn't have the testicular fortitude to call at any level higher than that. It has nothing to do with game awareness either. The official that called the "T" in the 1993 NCAA championship game sureashell had game awareness. He was aware that Michigan had no TO's left and he was also aware that the rules made him grant the TO request. Making up excuses not to make a righteous call has got absolutely nothing to do with game awareness.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

We always exercise our personal judgement even if the rule is perfectly clear.

What if the player said, "I DIDN'T CALL A TIME OUT, I said 'sideout'!" If the headcoach request for it, then it's a different case.

Coming from a coach, I might buy it (unlikely, though). From a player, though? I've never heard one of them shout "sideout" during play.

Your evaluator would also question your game-awareness. "Chi, you know White doesn't have any more time out, why did you grant it?"

I'd like to think that my evaluator would, I dunno, back me up for following the rule here. Game awareness is knowing how many TOs a team has left and knowing how many fouls each team has committed. Game awareness does NOT include changing your calls because of those numbers!

Grant the time out if the player says it "loud enough" (now with that you really need to use your judgement) or if he/she signals the time out. Game tape will always back you up if the player signals it, but cannot prove that he said timeout.

If you're worried about the 'consequences' of a he said-she said with some teenager over a timeout request, you might be in the wrong business.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

If the timeout is coming directly from a head coach, then you MUST grant it to him/her. If it's coming from a player and it's not loud enough for anyone to hear it except for you, I would probably think twice.

Cool. If you were doing the 1993 NCAA championship game and Chris Webber quietly asked you for a TO, your philosophy would have been to ignore it. Know what? Your philosophy really, really needs to grow some balls.

That's terrible advice imo. Just call the game. Officials aren't supposed to influence the result of any game. We aren't supposed to insert our personal philosophies into any call that may give a team an unfair advantage not intended by the rules.

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Cool. If you were doing the 1993 NCAA championship game and Chris Webber quietly asked you for a TO, your philosophy would have been to ignore it. Know what? Your philosophy really, really needs to grow some balls.

That's terrible advice imo. Just call the game. Officials aren't supposed to influence the result of any game. We aren't supposed to insert out personal philosophies into any call that may give a team an unfair advantage not intended by the rules.

Chris Webber made it loud and obviously enough for more than one officials to hear and notice it. I'm arguing that if I'm the only person in the entire gym that hears the timeout, I'm going to hold my whistle until he make it loud or obvious enough to grant it. WE must exercise our judgement that fits the game. This scenario has nothing to do with COURAGE.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

I'm arguing that if I'm the only person in the entire gym that hears the timeout, I'm going to hold my whistle until he make it loud or obvious enough to grant it. WE must exercise our judgement that fits the game. This scenario has nothing to do with COURAGE.

Sorry, but if you fail to make any CORRECT and APPROPRIATE call, you lack both good judgment and courage imo.

And also imo you won't get to the NCAA D1 level, and stay there, if you make up weak excuses for not making the correct call.

Just some advice for any official that agrees with Mwanr1...take it fwiw....it is NOT a good idea to tell your evaluator after the game that you heard a legitimate TO request, but that you ignored it because you knew his team was out of TO's and the request wasn't discernable to everybody in the crowd. Not a good idea imo.

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one. Mwanr1.

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Sorry, but if you fail to make any CORRECT and APPROPRIATE call, you lack both good judgment and courage imo.

Unfortunately in this business, even though deep down we want to do the CORRECT AND APPROPRIATE thing, we cannot always exercise it. Take these two examples below and you tell me which is the b>CORRECT and APPROPRIATE call

1. You walk pass the headcoach and he whisper in your ears, "F**k you"

and

2. you walk pass the headcoach and he screams "F**k you" (loud enough for the 1st row can hear it).

What would you guys have done?

In my honest opinion and correct me if I"m wrong, I'll ignore the 1st scenaior because no one but me heard the F BOMB. Is it the right thing to T the headcoach, sure it is. Am I going to whack him? NO because I'll NEVER win that battle against. HE/SHE will lie up the a55 and say "I never said that." My word against their word - they win.

Second scenario is different because he/she said it loud enough. Am I going to whack him? HELL FREAKING YES.

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Cool. If you were doing the 1993 NCAA championship game and Chris Webber quietly asked you for a TO, your philosophy would have been to ignore it. Know what? Your philosophy really, really needs to grow some balls.

That's terrible advice imo. Just call the game. Officials aren't supposed to influence the result of any game. We aren't supposed to insert out personal philosophies into any call that may give a team an unfair advantage not intended by the rules.

btw, if you look at the video, after Chris Webber rebounds the bball, he committed a traveling violation. According to your theory, if the "officials aren't supposed to influence the result of the game," the new T should have called a traveling first, correct????" It looks to me that right there and then, a NCAA championship official didn't call a traveling and gave Michigan an "unfair advantage".

How come the officials didn't get any crap for not calling the travel violation? It is because he's exercising judgement that FITS THE GAME!!!!!!!!

Here's a link to that travelling and timeout

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NH1ujxNwrkA

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

btw, if you look at the video, after Chris Webber rebounds the bball, he committed a traveling violation. According to your theory, if the "officials aren't supposed to influence the result of the game," the new T should have called a traveling first, correct????" It looks to me that right there and then, a NCAA championship official didn't call a traveling and gave Michigan an "unfair advantage".

How come the officials didn't get any crap for not calling the travel violation?

The officials actually took a ton of a crap for missing that traveling call. That was, plain and simple, a blown call. However, it wasn't a deliberately blown call. Failing to honor a legitimate TO request is deliberately blowing the call. That's one heckuva big difference.

Apples and oranges.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The officials actually took a ton of a crap for missing that traveling call. That was, plain and simple, a blown call. However, it wasn't a deliberately blown call.

See how times change. Nowadays, college officials deliberately blow 20 traveling calls per game. It's true, it's true.

http://forum.officiating.com/showpos...9&postcount=13

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

Team A has no TOs left ... Team A down 2 and tries to call time out ... do you grant it and then proceed with the tech or since you have knowledge that they have none left do you ignore the request?

From the NFHS Basketball Handbook under Chronology of Basketball Rules:
1978 -- "officials' must grant a time-out request, even though it is excessive."

[cdaref]

The mistake that seems to be being made here is that people are presuming the coach doesnt know he or she is out of time outs and by not granting the timeout we are somehow saving them from an unintended T. Problem is, there are times when the coach is doing it on purpose and it makes sense. Thus the rule is as it is--you see it, you confirm it is a request for TO, you grant it. Which is also why you simply cant embrace the advice that you should not pay attention to time outs. In fact, just the opposite is true (I hope the experienced refs will agree) that you should definately have the game awareness and situational awareness to know time outs and fouls. The good practice at the end of the game is to tell coaches how many they have remaining. That takes you out of teh judgement call of wondering whether they are making a mistake or not. You see it, grant it.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by cdaref

The mistake that seems to be being made here is that people are presuming the coach doesnt know he or she is out of time outs and by not granting the timeout we are somehow saving them from an unintended T. Problem is, there are times when the coach is doing it on purpose and it makes sense. Thus the rule is as it is--you see it, you confirm it is a request for TO, you grant it.

Agree 100% to this point.

Originally Posted by cdaref

Which is also why you simply cant embrace the advice that you should not pay attention to time outs. In fact, just the opposite is true (I hope the experienced refs will agree) that you should definately have the game awareness and situational awareness to know time outs and fouls. The good practice at the end of the game is to tell coaches how many they have remaining. That takes you out of teh judgement call of wondering whether they are making a mistake or not. You see it, grant it.

This I disagree with very strongly (and I believe that most experienced officials do too).
Only inform the coach when the team has used its final time-out. Other than that an official can have an awareness of how many and of what type remain, but stating such to a coach only exposes the official to a HUGE problem if he is mistaken.
Bottom line stick with "see it/hear it, grant it" and stay away from giving extra information to the coaches. Managers and assistants can communicate with the table for that. Afterall, that's their job.