Couple questions from Exam part 1

[w_sohl]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Both of you should take a look at 2-11-11.

If a scoring mistake is made, not as a result of any decision by the officials on the court, but solely due to the scorer making a mistake, this does not qualify as a correctable error. It is simply a bookkeeping mistake.

I think any of the officials can bring it to the attention of the referee, however the final word is the referee's

[Adam]

Originally Posted by w_sohl

I think any of the officials can bring it to the attention of the referee, however the final word is the referee's

According to 2-11-11, the scorer can fix it without the referee's help. Presumably, this would also mean they could use the help of U1 or U2.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Both of you should take a look at 2-11-11.

If a scoring mistake is made, not as a result of any decision by the officials on the court, but solely due to the scorer making a mistake, this does not qualify as a correctable error. It is simply a bookkeeping mistake.

Are you saying the statement was true?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Are you saying the statement was true?

Yes.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yes.

Okay, I'm in. Based on what?

[just another ref]

Scorers correct their own mistakes all the time, without even notifying the officials. 2-11-11 deals with a discrepancy between two books. In this situation there may not have even been a mistake anywhere except in the visitor's book, which is not the referee's concern.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Scorers correct their own mistakes all the time, without even notifying the officials. 2-11-11 deals with a discrepancy between two books.

While it may be true that scorers do that, it is not proper practice. They should notify the referee before making any changes to the books because the books are the official record of what happened in the game. (And I'm not talking about the simple "oops I just wrote that on the wrong side sorry...erase...erase...I'll put in where it belongs." I'm talking about one scorer seeing the Trail official signal a three point goal and the other who was blowing his nose didn't and wrote down two points. Three minutes later when they add up the totals at the end of the quarter and one book doesn't match the other book or the scoreboard, that scorer should not make a correction to his book on his own without telling the referee.) The reason that there are supposed to be two books is to provide a check on the first and ensure that simple errors do not occur. They are to contain the same information.

Originally Posted by just another ref

In this situation there may not have even been a mistake anywhere except in the visitor's book, which is not the referee's concern.

Totally wrong! The books are to match, and for that very reason the referee should be concerned with what is in the visiting book.

As 2-11-11 clearly says, the official scorer is to "[c]ompare records with the visiting scorer after each goal, each foul, each charged time-out, and end of each quarter and extra period, notifying the referee at once of any discrepancy."

The referee is to rectify the discrepancy by finding the error, applying his definite knowledge to resolve the difference, or accepting the record of the official book.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Okay, I'm in. Based on what?

Because the rule clearly says the REFEREE is the one who corrects any discrepancies in the book. It doesn't say the nearest official or any official who is notified.
Also the REFEREE is the person who designates the official book (2-4-3) and approves the halftime score (2-5-7), and the final score (2-5-7, 2-11-11). The book is under the purview of the REFEREE.

[Adam]

I see it now. For some reason, I was including correctable errors in this; equating "scoring" with, well, points rather than seeing "scoring mistake" as a mistake by the scorer.

[jritchie]

Finally my books!!
Okay, I understand what you guys are talking about on the scoring and scorer issues, it says the REFEREE makes the final decision. But this question was talking about correctable errors and in 2-10-1 it says: OFFICIALS may correct an error.......so I have to take that as too question #11, since it's under the section on correctable errors on the test, as FALSE! If it was under the scoring section, we would have to say True, but since it is talking about correctable errors, shouldn't this question be false????

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jritchie

Finally my books!!
Okay, I understand what you guys are talking about on the scoring and scorer issues, it says the REFEREE makes the final decision. But this question was talking about correctable errors and in 2-10-1 it says: OFFICIALS may correct an error.......so I have to take that as too question #11, since it's under the section on correctable errors on the test, as FALSE! If it was under the scoring section, we would have to say True, but since it is talking about correctable errors, shouldn't this question be false????

1) I woulnd't consider the "heading information" to be part of the question.

2) You originally wrote that the question was, "11. only the REFEREE is authorized to correct a scoring mistake" In fact, the question is, "Only the referee is authorized to correct the erroneous awarding of a score." That's a completely different question, and one that is easily answered in the book (2-10-1).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

While it may be true that scorers do that, it is not proper practice. They should notify the referee before making any changes to the books because the books are the official record of what happened in the game. (And I'm not talking about the simple "oops I just wrote that on the wrong side sorry...erase...erase...I'll put in where it belongs." I'm talking about one scorer seeing the Trail official signal a three point goal and the other who was blowing his nose didn't and wrote down two points. Three minutes later when they add up the totals at the end of the quarter and one book doesn't match the other book or the scoreboard, that scorer should not make a correction to his book on his own without telling the referee.) The reason that there are supposed to be two books is to provide a check on the first and ensure that simple errors do not occur. They are to contain the same information.



Totally wrong! The books are to match, and for that very reason the referee should be concerned with what is in the visiting book.

As 2-11-11 clearly says, the official scorer is to "[c]ompare records with the visiting scorer after each goal, each foul, each charged time-out, and end of each quarter and extra period, notifying the referee at once of any discrepancy."

The referee is to rectify the discrepancy by finding the error, applying his definite knowledge to resolve the difference, or accepting the record of the official book.

So you're saying if the visiting scorer marks a field goal as a 2 instead of a 3, when the books are compared and the mistake is discovered, the referee should be notified before making a correction in the visitor's book?
Not in the real world.

My take here is that the referee, without question, is the final authority, but his approval is not necessary to correct every little mistake.

[Back In The Saddle]

Would you rather have the scorekeepers making corrections without you knowing? I would rather know there was an issue, what the issue was, how it was fixed, and how sure the scorekeepers are that the fix is right. If it becomes an issue later in the game, I don't want to be blindsided by it.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2) You originally wrote that the question was, "11. only the REFEREE is authorized to correct a scoring mistake" In fact, the question is, "Only the referee is authorized to correct the erroneous awarding of a score." That's a completely different question, and one that is easily answered in the book (2-10-1).

Once again, Bob is spot on!
The first is a bookkeeping mistake. Only the referee deals with that. There was no rule set aside by the officials on the court that resulted in this, so it does not qualify as a correctable error. (Note that along with being one of the five items listed, the error must be due to the setting aside of a rule by the officials. Both of those requirements must be met for something to be classified as a correctable error. Otherwise, the situation is just a mistake which sometimes can be fixed and sometimes can't.)
The second is a clearly defined correctable error. Any official is authorized to handle a correctable error, but the referee should certainly be involved.

Always listen to Bob.