Consecutive Time-out

[Mark Padgett]

NF rule 5-12-3 states successive timeouts shall not be granted after expiration of playing time for the fourth quarter or any extra period. There's no rule prohibiting them when there's time left on the clock during regulation time. This seems to be pretty clear to me.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

This seems to be pretty clear to me.

How can you be "clear" about any rule involving an extra period?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

NF rule 5-12-3 states successive timeouts shall not be granted after expiration of playing time for the fourth quarter or any extra period. There's no rule prohibiting them when there's time left on the clock during regulation time. This seems to be pretty clear to me.

This is correct. The OP was mistaken.

[Skarecrow]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

NF rule 5-12-3 states successive timeouts shall not be granted after expiration of playing time for the fourth quarter or any extra period. There's no rule prohibiting them when there's time left on the clock during regulation time. This seems to be pretty clear to me.

I might be wrong, but I think the OP hinted that the coach was asking for TWO at the same time...telling the official he wanted a second timeout after the first had expired, so it seemed to be a "simultaneous" timeout request and not a consecutive timeout...which he correctly denied. I might be wrong, but that is how I read the coach's request in the OP.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by red

Situation: Team A is trailing by 2 points with 1:20 on the clock. Immediatley after Team B is fouled, going to the line for 2 shot bonus, Team A coach requests time-out. While report the TO, the coach requests to have another time-out following the first - consecutive TO. I denied his request. He called his second TO after the first free-throw was completed.

What is the ruling. I didn't get a clear interpretation from the Rule Book?

Originally Posted by Skarecrow

I might be wrong, but I think the OP hinted that the coach was asking for TWO at the same time...telling the official he wanted a second timeout after the first had expired, so it seemed to be a "simultaneous" timeout request and not a consecutive timeout...which he correctly denied. I might be wrong, but that is how I read the coach's request in the OP.

It seems that the timing of the request was imprecise, but that what the coach was seeking was proper. The official incorrectly denied him a time-out when he could have used one. If the timing of the request is the problem, then simply tell the coach to please ask again at the end of this time-out. I believe that red misunderstood the rule.

I applaud him for coming on here and seeking clarification. He will know it now.

[Skarecrow]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It seems that the timing of the request was imprecise, but that what the coach was seeking was proper. The official incorrectly denied him a time-out when he could have used one. If the timing of the request is the problem, then simply tell the coach to please ask again at the end of this time-out. I believe that red misunderstood the rule.

I applaud him for coming on here and seeking clarification. He will know it now.

I agree with that assessment....

[red]

So, the coach cannot have a two time out request, but he could have followed his initial time out with another time before the and action on the floor. Thanks for the clarification.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by red

So, the coach cannot have a two time out request, but he could have followed his initial time out with another time before the and action on the floor. Thanks for the clarification.

Note that in NCAA a coach can request that 2 30-secpond TOs be "combined" into a 60-second TO so the players can sit. This request must be made before the TO starts.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by red

So, the coach cannot have a two time out request, but he could have followed his initial time out with another time before the and action on the floor. Thanks for the clarification.

I was thinking about this last night and it occurred to me that the timing of the coach's request is unusual, but seems to be proper. According to 5-8-3 the coach has every right to request another time-out during a time-out. Afterall, the ball is dead and there is no replacement of player pending, so why not?
I'm inclined to honor to the request and instruct the timer to simply time a another time-out following the expiration of the current one. I would ask the timer to sound all of the horns as normal.

Just for added certainty, I'll see if I can locate anything in writing from the NFHS on this.

[IREFU2]

I have been looking and havent seen anything stating that its against the rules to call consecutive timeouts. I think its the wording, its successive, not consecutive....

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I was thinking about this last night and it occurred to me that the timing of the coach's request is unusual, but seems to be proper. According to 5-8-3 the coach has every right to request another time-out during a time-out. Afterall, the ball is dead and there is no replacement of player pending, so why not?
I'm inclined to honor to the request and instruct the timer to simply time a another time-out following the expiration of the current one. I would ask the timer to sound all of the horns as normal.

Just for added certainty, I'll see if I can locate anything in writing from the NFHS on this.

Just thinking out loud (well, as loud as my keyboard gets), but how would this differ from a coach asking for any other TO in the future? "After they make this FT, give me a TO." "My team's gonna pass the ball around to run some time off, so when the clock gets down to 10 give me a TO." Yea, I know there's a live ball in between there, but I guess my thinking is a TO is granted when it's able to be taken, not granted for some point in the future. In the OP, I would've told the coach the same thing I tell coaches who ask for the TO after an upcoming FT, "Thanks for giving me the heads up; just remind me again after the FT (or TO)". Iow, I wouldn't have made a big deal about "denying" the request, just make them give me a nod or such to verify the next TO request at the end of the first.

What would you do if the coach requests two TO's at once, then decides before the first one ends that they don't need the second one after all? Is it still considered "granted"?