How? Unless you heard and saw the HC request it, how can you force him to burn one?

5.8.3 situation e

Doesn't this cover the case where team A has the ball, and team B's coach requests TO? In other words, the official grants a request where one shouldn't have been granted. I don't think this would cover the situation where there was no request.

Indiana,

don't have my books with me, but I still wouldn't grant a TO to team that should not be granted TO (team not in possession). This would give that team undue advantage to set up a play. IW and continue play

Really? At the NFHS level?

Did some research. Here is the thread http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=31887

I think we are talking about when an official erroneously grants a time-out.

I see some disagree with me. I'm not charging a coach with a TO that I granted him because some Dad in the stands asked for it. I screwed that up, not the coach.

Better yet, I'm slow to grant a coach's time out anyway; so I'll know it was him/her before I blow the whistle. (Knock on wood).

I forgot about this discussion.

I know this case play covers the situation I saw in a holiday tournament game one year. A1 shoots, misses, and B1 grabs the rebound and starts upcourt. A's coach is so upset her team didn't run the play properly, she starts yelling at the official standing front of her, "Gimme a time-out!!" Gimme a time-out NOW!!!" So, the poor official blows his whistle, and both the coach and official realize the "oops" about the same time. But, the request was granted, even though B wasn't allowed to have one in that situation, as per this case play.

Maybe BBallRef and JR will get on my case for this, but if I KNOW there is no request, I'm not granting a TO and going with the IW. If there is ANY possiblity that there was a word or signal that could've been a request, then the TO is granted. I don't ever want to get into that game where a coach or a team is purposely saying something confusing at the end of a game to possibly gain the advantage of the IW.

I don't know if it's both men and women, but I know the NCAA-W came out with the ruling that if a player is in the air and going OOB, and requests a TO to prevent a violation, and the official erroneously blows the whistle to grant the TO, the TO is not granted, the violation is administered, and it is treated as an IW. Granted, this is not the Fed., but it tells me there are a few isolated cases where the TO is not automatically granted just because the official blows the whistle to grant it.

Oh no, I agree with Mr. Quixote...maybe I'll join him in his windmill tilting. :)

That's the best way to avoid the issue - make sure the coach or player is requesting a legitimate TO. I would rather miss one or two requests that I couldn't verify in the heat of the moment, than to have to deal with a costly misunderstanding.

Good point, although the situation still seems clear to me. The game is stopped neither to correct a timing mistake nor was this an inadvertent whistle, so bring the subs in in NCAAM. In NCAAW, they stay at the table.

How do you know it was a dad in the stands?

I don't, and I don't know it was the coach. If I don't "know" it was the coach, I'm not making him burn the TO.
It's just like blowing your whistle for a phantom OOB call and knowing immediately that you kicked it. Go with the IW and get the ball in play quickly (unless one of the coaches now wants to use a TO.)

The case play is clearly referring to team B (typically the team without the ball in the case book) requesting a TO and the whistle blowing for that. Here, you do not know who said it. Play on.