How Would You Explain This To A Coach?
 

Hey fellow zebras!

I realize that some of you may not want to explain anything on this. After all, this seems somewhat stupid of a coach to think this way. Anyhow, here goes...

Team A takes the ball out of bounds after a made basket by Team B. They inbound and begin working the ball towards their front court. As they are approaching a 10-second count, the coach for Team A calls for and is awarded a timeout. Team B's coach gets upset that the call is made. The official counting was only up to 7 seconds. What would you tell Team B's coach? What rules and/or case book citings would you want to refer to on this?

And here's something I thought of... what if the coach for B is asked in return if he thinks officials should award a team a timeout when they're 3.5 seconds into the count for a 5-count to get the ball in bounds?

I look forward to responses and your thoughts.

What could you possibly have to explain here?? If you feel that an explanation is necessary in this case you will spend your whole life explaining things, which is a bad idea, in general, and in this case, in my opinion, is not an option.

yes, I know...
 

To just another ref...

Thanks for your response. The idea I have here is that this was in a youth league and I'd like to give this coach a chance... I won't do this for him every time. It's just that I'm certain to see him and his team again and I'd like to see if he will make himself educatable.

You don't say exactly why the coach was upset. He thought the count was slow, or what?

Sorry about that... the coach felt that the timeout should not have been awarded since A was nearing the 10-second count.

Also what would you refer to in order to show that a new 10-count would be allowed when play is resumed? This is different from the latest in the NBA from what I heard broadcasters saying during the NBA Playoffs. They get 8 seconds TOTAL, even if that 8 seconds is broken up by a timeout. Or at least that's what I was hearing the tv broadcasters saying.

Sounds like this guy has more to learn than he can be taught during the game. Also, if your own way of learning the rules is based very much on listening to tv announcers, you probably have a bit of work left to do yourself.

Tell the coach that they did away with that concept 25 years ago.

This casebook play:

9.8 SITUATION C: After A1 has dribbled for nine seconds in A's backcourt: (a) A1 requests a time-out; or (b) B1 deflects the ball out of bounds. RULING: In both (a) and (b), Team A will have 10 seconds to advance the ball to frontcourt following the throw-in if a player of Team A gains control in A's backcourt.

You are correct about the NBA rule. It is a hard 8 seconds. They also can't throw the ball into the backcourt on a throw-in from adjacent to the frontcourt until the final two minutes of the 4th quarter. Neither of those concepts apply at the HS level.

Change Of Status ???
 

I haven't thought about the old Change of Status rule in a long time. I believe that the old rule stated that a team could not be granted a timeout when 80% of a count had been achieved, eight seconds of a ten second count, four seconds of a five second count (inbounding, closely guarded).

You believe correctly. I believe that it was longer than 25 years ago though. That one was long gone by 1983.

"Coach, there's no rule prohibiting it; there hasn't been for more than 25 years."

"Coach, they get a new 10 seconds."

All that needs to be said, if anything, in either case.

Thanks Nevadaref, that's one thing I really wanted to see!

If you know the rule is different in some other rules set, and the coach is "friendly", I find it helpful to say something like, "You're right -- that is the rule in the NBA. Here, we're using highschool rules (I almost never say "FED rules" -- they don't know what that means), and the rules are different. In high school, the team gets a new 10-second count."

If the coach isn't being too friendly, I use the "5 words or fewer" rule: This isn't the NBA, coach.

"Get a rulebook, coach. They have them now in all one syllable words with lots of pictures so you shouldn't have any trouble understanding it - and...I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here." :cool:

Needs an explanation about as much as Team B hit the ball OOB and it's now Team A's. ....A timeout was requested and granted by the team in control of the ball. What is not to understand coach B?

My response would be something along the lines of "Coach, his timeout request is within the rules, so I'm granting it. Now please go to your huddle."

However, I don't have to deal with live ball timeout requests anymore because under the FIBA rules timeouts can only be granted during a dead ball.

ditto to all above, but you might add "if your team calls one, you'd want the same, wouldn't you?"

Goodbye Len Bias ...
 

NFHS deleted Change of Status rule in 1986.

Good research, Billy! :)
That appears in the "Chronology of Basketball Rules" section of the NFHS Handbook.

I saw this happen recently in a game: Team A inbounded the ball, and the game clock did not start. After a little time had elaspsed, the refs blew the whistle to adjust the clock. After discussion at the table, five seconds were removed from the game clock. Team A was then given the ball on the side at the point where they were at when play was stopped. Team A then took seven seconds to get it across the midcourt line. No violation was called.

I can see where if Team A calls timeout getting a new ten seconds. They've given up a timeout in exchange for the fresh ten seconds. And, I can see if Team B deflects a ball out of bounds getting a new ten seconds since the violation that caused the ball to become dead was against Team B. But, in this case, it seemed that the clock malfunction (something that was beyond either team's control) rewarded Team A.

I'm just a fan, but my buddy and I were discussing it. We said that if Team A was going to get a new ten seconds, they should have been given the ball on the inbounds under the goal--which sounded logical since they would then have ten seconds to go the full half court rather than ten seconds to only go part of the half court.

I'm sure that this was called correctly, but it just didn't seem right. Thoughts?

You have a couple of issues here which may have affected each other, but by rule are not related. The officials noticed the clock malfunction and stopped the game to correct the situation. Afterward, they correctly resumed play at the point which it was interrupted. By FED rules, if they adjusted the clock, it had to be backed by definite knowledge of the elapsed time, in this case most likely the trail official's ten second count. In reality, many officials estimate the timing error and make an adjustment anyway.
And as for the second issue, no matter why the game was stopped, the ten second count starts over. The violation requires continuous control in the backcourt for ten seconds.

I think that the play was called correctly. It do agree that there is an unfair element to the procedure, but it's what we have right now.

I also like the FIBA rule where the time limit to get the ball across the division line is reset only on a B foul or a COP.

What unfair element are you talking about?:confused:

15 seconds left in a quarter. Team A has ball in backcourt with heavy pressure from Team B and ref's count is at 6 seconds when he stops the game because the game clock hasn't started. Game clock is now reset to 9 seconds and Team A still has ball in backcourt with a new count which now means they no longer need to advance the ball into the frontcourt before the quarter ends.

I believe he means something akin to that scenario

In general, I will wait until the ball is advanced to the front court before stopping play to reset the clock.

Agreed. And when I work with a shot clock I try to do the same--wait until the ball is in the front court before I blow it dead and reset the shot clock.