Difference of understanding with P...

[TravelinMan]

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

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TravelinMan

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?

[Indianaref]

Did some research. Here is the thread Timeout question!

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

Did some research. Here is the thread Timeout question!

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.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by TravelinMan

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

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

[Adam]

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).

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.)

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

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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).

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.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

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

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

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.