Re: Re: An explanation for Cornellref
 

In Marks original play, B had the ball and was OOB. Whether he is facing the floor or not is inmaterial. A TO should noy be granted at this point, even under the most liberal of terms.

Ahh, but you can still grant the timeout during an inadvertent whistle.

Actually had that happen during AAU regionals. We called TO as soon as we made the basket (2 players signalled for it and I did - one was right under the basket!), official missed all three initial requests, ball was being inbounded when he finally noticed and granted the TO. In reality, the TO should have been granted upon request but he was not sufficiently aware to see three diffferent people request the TO. He should never have granted it at the time he did.

The official that granted the timeout realized he made an error, and loked at a loss as to what should be done. It appeared that he was going to just put the ball back in play. Due to discussions on this forum, I knew what the right call should be - inadvertent whistle, TO granted. He and his partner got together and his partner called us over and explained the call (just as stated above). Opposing coach was livid, I was glad we got what we had legitimately requested and had been ignored. Neither of us was happy with official #1.

Hawks Coach,try this one on for size.Eight seconds to go,A scores and is down 1 point,A calls TO after B grabs ball and is just stepping over the end line for throw-in---noting that you certainly know the rule,what do you want called if:
1)You are the A coach.
2)You are the B coach.

JR
I accept in either condition (me being A or B) the ref granting the TO - that is, in my experience, the way the game is called. If we are trying to inbound, we will do it as quickly as possible to eliminate to all exents possible the TO call. But if we aren't even OOB yet, go ahead and call it and I won't gripe!

The condition I agreed with Gary on was the one where the ref granted the TO 3 seconds into the 5 count - that should never happen.

Coach,I don't have a problem with that at all.That's not what I'd call a "late" TO.I'm talking about granting one when it's called as the thrower-in has the ball and is crossing or already over the end line.That,to me,is a "late" TO and gives the D an unfair advantage.

Re: interesting
 

You're welcome,coach!:D I've had coaches admit to me that they've done this.I think that there's nothing the matter with knowing the rulebook,and using it to your advantage.It's like getting to know the tendencies of officials that you see fairly often.Smart coaches do it.

Re: Re: interesting
 

Just remember - if this happens with 5 seconds or less on the clock, it needs to be either ignored, or it gets an automatic T (without previous warning).

Coach, was this boys or girls, NF or NCAA?

Hawks Coach:

You don't seem to be having much luck with "our" officials. I assume you are talking about the recent action at Westfields/Jefferson. If so, unfortunately, in these situations you see the best and the worst of "our" officials. Quite a few of our varsity officials will not, for some unknown reason, work AAU ball. I would much rather work girls AAU than girls rec leagues.

Re: Re: Re: interesting
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Dexter

Quote:

Just remember - if this happens with 5 seconds or less on the clock, it needs to be either ignored, or it gets an automatic T (without previous warning).

Mark, that was my thought too, but I can't find the rule that covers that situation. Got a citation?

Chuck

Re: Re: Re: Re: interesting
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dexter Quote: Just remember - if this happens with 5 seconds or less on the clock, it needs to be either ignored, or it gets an automatic T (without previous warning). Mark, that was my thought too, but I can't find the rule that covers that situation. Got a citation? Chuck

My books are, honestly, in the mail right now. This is covered in the case book (NF at least, don't know if it's a rule in NCAA) as a note in or around the section regarding technical fouls for throw-in plane boundary violations. I'll post it here once I have access.

dblref, are your NCAA girls games played under NF or NCAA rules? Does Hawks coach have girls or boys?

Re: Re: Re: Re: interesting
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dexter Quote: Just remember - if this happens with 5 seconds or less on the clock, it needs to be either ignored, or it gets an automatic T (without previous warning). Mark, that was my thought too, but I can't find the rule that covers that situation. Got a citation?

9.2.11 SITUATION:
Comment: In situations with the clock running and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic.

Hold on a second, the suggested ploy involved knocking the ball away after a made basket in order to draw a first warning. This warning is covered under 10-1-5(d). The case book citation you have offered involves a boundary plane warning in the last five seconds. These are two distinctly different warnings. The case book for 10-1-5(d) doesn't have the "last second tactic" situation included. Do we ascribe the 9-2-11 ruling to the 10-1-5 ruling because they both have the same intent?