Correctable error situation?
 

This supposedly actually happened, although I didn't see it myself. Just want to see what people think about it.

4th quarter, 3.5 seconds remaining. Team A is leading 54-52. A1 is fouled, but not in the act of shooting. Team A is in the bonus. A1 attempts the free throw, which is unsuccessful. B5 rebounds the miss, outlets to B1 near midcourt. B1 releases a try (obviously a 3-point try). The horn sounds clearly after the ball is in flight, and the try is successful.

Team B appears to win 55-54.

Before the officials leave the court, the table informs the officials that Team B had 10 team fouls and A1 should've been awarded 2 free throws.

The officials decide that the error is correctable. They disallow the 3-point basket, put 3.5 seconds back on the clock, and award A1 the second free throw. They allow the teams to play the make or miss. A1's second free throw is unsuccessful, B5 rebounds the miss and passes to B1, but B1's heave is unsuccessful this time.

Team A wins, 54-52.

1) Was the error still correctable, since the horn had sounded to end the game?

2) If so, should the officials have negated B1's 3-point field goal?

3) If so, should the officials have put the time back on the clock?

4) If you answer "no" to any of these, what should have happened?

I thought everything that occured prior to the correctable error being discovered stood and play resumes from POI? Shoot the FT & play OT on the make?

1) Yes, it's correctable as per rule 2-10-2. The made basket at the end of the game was the first dead ball after the clock started.
2)No..as per rule 2-10-5.
3) No..as per rule 2-10-5.

Count the 3-point basket by B1. Put A1 on the line for 1 FT with no time on the clock and no one lined up on the lanes. If A1 makes the FT, OT. If A1 misses, team B wins 55-54.

It's true, it's true.....

My guess (based on my rule books being at home) is that they did it wrong.

Shoulda let A1 shoot his second FT with no time and lanes empty.
Make it for OT...miss it, and officials grab their coats and sprint to the locker room.

I'm gonna hafta learn to type with more than 2 fingers...

Depends - which two fingers are you using?

Agree with JR's and Chi1towns's responses. Iirc, the only time points would be cancelled would be if an unmerited FT was awarded, or the wrong player attempted the FT.

Scrappy, was this a HS or college game?

*wow*
It's an honor just to be mentioned in the same sentence with JR. Being right, well, that's the icing on the cake. Guess I'm learning a little something.

It's not often that you can be mentioned in the same sentence with JR AND be right.

Or FT at the wrong basket.

There was a previous thread on this game. I've searched for it, but can't locate it. If I recall the team attempting the FTs was only leading by a single point, so the three-point shot by the opponents would have given them a two point lead. Thus the merited FT that could be corrected under 2-10 would not be attempted in this case as the 4th quarter is over and it would not alter the result.

I believe it was a HS game.

You Mean That I Didn't Really Foul Out? You're A Great Referee ...
 

Be careful with the above statement. The rule below doesn't apply to this specific situation, but under some circumstances fouls can be canceled, if they're not unsporting, flagrant, intentional or technical fouls.

2-10-4: If the error is a free throw by the wrong player or at the wrong basket, or the awarding of an unmerited free throw, the free throw and the activity during it, other than unsporting, flagrant, intentional or technical fouls, shall be canceled.

Stripper's Dressing Room
 

Is this an oxymoron, like Jumbo Shrimp, Small Crowd, Nondairy Creamer, Wireless Cable, Genuine Veneer, or Government Organization?

LOL. I knew as soon as I wrote it that it was terrible, but I didn't feel like writing out what I actually meant. "I was told that this actually happened, but have no proof". Hey, at least I didn't say that it supposably happened! :eek:

What can't you have a small crowd? Wouldn't it depend on the context or size of the venue?

If you're a 5x5 ft room and there were 6 people in there you would have a small crowd, right?

Or how about the NWS recent statement that residents in certain parts of texas "may face certain death"?

A1 fouled. Official signals 1 and 1. A1 misses the first FT but A2 scores on the rebound.

Before the ball is put into play by B the official becomes aware of the fact that it should have been a 2 shot double bonus and stops play.

What happens?

A1 shoots the second free throw without anyone on the lane. Make or miss, you continue at the POI. It is B's ball on the baseline, they have the ability to run.

-Josh

Josh is right, but you may want to <strike>consider</strike> be aware that B's coach isn't gonna be happy.

To be clear are you saying that the basket by A counts AND they shoot the FT? I assume that's what you are saying based off of Snagwell's response.

Yes, that's correct. A's rebound basket counts. A will now shoot his other free throw, and B will get the ball for an endline throwin. A got a legitimate rebound, and it wouldn't be fair to take it away from them.

Um, no, that's the absolute <b>last</b> thing that you should <b>consider</b> when you make any proper, correct, have-to-get-right call.

Aamof, whether a coach is gonna be happy or not should <b>never</b> be a <b>consideration</b> in any call.

<b>Never</b> consider.....you'll go blind.

Bad choice of words imo, Snaqs......

I'm going to bet that Snaq didn't mean that the coach's emotion predicted by the official should have an impact on a ruling, but rather Snaq meant that a coach will have an emotion about the ruling.

Those are two different things. One is unprofessional; one is not: which is the one that most officials will clue in to.

No difference....

Why should any official have to consider at anytime how any coach feels about any call?

That was my point....and I'd bet also that Snaqs didn't mean his post to convey the message that it actually did convey.

Two words ... Game Management. Getting surprised by a coach's heated reaction to a tough call can put you on your heels and leave you unprepared to handle it. In my experience, that's usually a bad thing. Recognizing that the coach is likely to react badly, and being prepared to handle it calmly and patiently usually leads to a much better result.

It's not about factoring the coach's likely reaction into making the call; it's about being aware and prepared to deal with it properly. And I'm pretty sure that's what the Snaqmaster was getting at.

They shouldn't. They should just call the game - iow, they should do the job they're paid to do.

Many officials will figure out soon enough, if not through a basic understanding of human nature, then through game experience, what rulings coaches typically get emotional over.

Example: a close play on a break where the block/charge ruling surrounds the official's judgment if LGP was earned, versus an easy no-brainer where LGP had roots. In the first situation, an official should not call the block or charge based on any perceived emotion that will come from one of the coaches, but the official will certainly know in his head that one of the coaches (in this example) will be emotional about the call. In the second situation, a coach that complains about the call of an opponent that had roots and drawing the PC is just being a goof.

That's the difference.

Exactly.

Two words...Bull Pucky.

The sun comes up in the east and coaches complain about calls that go against their team. It comes with the territory. If you're surprised, on your heels and unprepared to deal with it, then you've either been an official for about 48 minutes or you're in the wrong avocation to start with.

Jeez, you're cranky this morning. You've been a ref so long that your awareness of what's coming next is second nature. Not all refs have gotten there yet.

Respectfully disagree. When an official makes an obvious blunder, such as this CE situation, they need to be mentally prepared to deal with a "Norv Turner" type reaction once you explain the ruling to them. We and they (officials & coaches) are human. And you cannot treat every situation as "oh, that's just a coach whining". If we f**k up we have to prepare to catch some extra flack. And there is a difference between "catching flack" and letting a coach sh!t all over you.

Two words...what Scrappy said :D

I must be missing something. Where above does it say that the <b>official</b> screwed up on the play being discussed? how do you know that it wasn't a table error? Most correctable errors are in my experience.

You'd better be prepared to catch flak on every single call that you make, and especially on the tough ones that you absolutely nail. You never know what is going to set <b>any</b> coach or player off. It's just the nature of the beast. And if it happens, you deal with it. Shrug.

Two words for you too....bull pucky.

If I knew what was coming next, I'd be a rich man..... and I'd be able to hire someone to read this forum for me....and respond accordingly.:p

Anybody that's officiated for longer than a minute and a half better damn well be prepared for a negative response to every single call...or non-call....that they make. If that's really surprising to anybody, then they haven't officiated for very long or they ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer. You don't have to develop <b>Game Management</b> skills:eek: to figger that out.

JMCO.

Wouldn't preventative officiating dictate that you bring both coaches together in this situation and explain the circumstances and ruling? I personally have never administered a CE but in my small mind, I would bring both coaches together, explain the situation, and then brace for Team B's coach to vent a little bit. It doesn't matter who's fault it is, the officials are going to be the one to take the heat, in my experience. Anyways, administratively how would you all handle a CE? Talk with both coaches together?

-Josh

Yep, I think it's better to give the exact same ruling to both parties in front of a witness (table) all at once.

Appreciate the affirmation. It's bound to happen sometime but to this date, knock on wood, it's been eluded.

-Josh

Depends on the CE. If it's something really obvious, like the table buzzing you that it shoulda been 1 n 1 while your administering the throw-in, then I wouldn't bother with the coaches unless they raise a question. Something more complicated, especially if we're going to have to do the POI thing and somebody's gonna get hosed...yeah, I'd be talking to the coaches. Together.

Okay, okay. I've gone back and fixed the original. I did not mean "consider" as in, "when making the decision, consider this...." No, I simply meant an official should "be aware" of what's coming next. B's coach here is going to be more unhappy and more vocal than if he thinks you missed a travel violation or a foul. A mistake is made, and he doesn't give a crap whether it's the officials' fault or the table. It's all the same to him, and to him, it's the officials' fault. CEs are just what they say, errors. They're messy.

This particular one is, aside from end-of-game CE scenarios, probably the worst. Make the ruling properly, and know you'll have a snippy coach for a bit. Know it so you can deal with it accordingly. I would have thought it was obvious from what I orginally wrote, but I fixed it just in case.

Furthermore, BNR states it well:

That's just about what I thought you meant. You can certainly "be aware" of the consequences of a call. At no point though, are you ever going to "consider" those consequences" <b>before</b> making that call.

You are <b>never</b> going to "consider" making any other call than your originally intended call.

That was my only real point....and I think that you got it. And I think that I now get your point also. and I agree with it too (fwiw).

I figured you were just picking on my sentence structure or something.

Actually I was picking on your word selection. i know you too well to consider that you actually meant the context of the word that you originally used. :)

That and me also forgetting to take my Metamucil this morning, of course.....

It's comforting to know that I can still hide my own Easter eggs though.

I'll just have to adjust my signature again.

The table didn't disallow the basket and put the time back on the clock, did they?