Consecutive Time-out

[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"?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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.

I don't believe that it is the same because there is no live ball time between when the request is made and when the time-out is granted. Both are occurring during the same dead ball period. That is the difference to me.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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"?

He asked for two. He gets two. If he is ready early and so is the other team, then we can short the second one and resume play, but it is still being charged. Too late to change his mind.

[Nevadaref]

Consider this situation:
Team A is travelling in two vans to the game site. Van 1 has the normal starting five and Van 2 has the second five. Van 1 gets a flat tire and is delayed. Van 2 is there in time for warm-ups and the scheduled tip-off.
The officials say that game must begin on time and so it does.
During the first dead ball, Coach A informs the official that he is going to take all five of his time-outs in the hope that his starting five can get there with more of the game left.

How would you handle that?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Consider this situation:
Team A is travelling in two vans to the game site. Van 1 has the normal starting five and Van 2 has the second five. Van 1 gets a flat tire and is delayed. Van 2 is there in time for warm-ups and the scheduled tip-off.
The officials say that game must begin on time and so it does.
During the first dead ball, Coach A informs the official that he is going to take all five of his time-outs in the hope that his starting five can get there with more of the game left.

How would you handle that?

I would tell him to request the time out at the proper time -- if his team was due to throw-in, he should really wait until I get to 4 seconds on the count to maximize the time he's wasting. If the other team has the ball, request the time out before it's handed to the thrower-in. I would not just award 5 consecutive timeout and tell the timer to count down 4 minutes.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I would not just award 5 consecutive timeout and tell the timer to count down 4 minutes.

Why not? What rule prohibits the coach from requesting all five time-outs at once?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why not? What rule prohibits the coach from requesting all five time-outs at once?

The word successive, to me, means one after the other. I will grant them, one after the other.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why not? What rule prohibits the coach from requesting all five time-outs at once?

Digressing somewhat, any problem with coach saying "if we make free throw, time out". Situation could involve a foul, opposing coach wanting TO and first saying, I don't want it now as other coach requested one.

Just askin'

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Consider this situation:
Team A is travelling in two vans to the game site. Van 1 has the normal starting five and Van 2 has the second five. Van 1 gets a flat tire and is delayed. Van 2 is there in time for warm-ups and the scheduled tip-off.
The officials say that game must begin on time and so it does.
During the first dead ball, Coach A informs the official that he is going to take all five of his time-outs in the hope that his starting five can get there with more of the game left.

How would you handle that?

Get the booster club to buy a new van...........

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Get the booster club to buy a new van...........

But, seriously, I don't see anything that allows to charge 2, 3, 4, or 5 TO's in a row all at one moment, even if they don't use them. I would do what Rich suggests - use one, get to 4 on the throw-in count, use the next one, until either the van shows up, or they run out of TO's. But I would not charge them with all five TO's if the van shows up after the second.

Nevada - here's a scenario for you: the team has 2 TO's left, but the coach says, "Give me 3 TO's in a row." Then, during the first TO period, the coach finds out he only had 2 left. Do you charge the T, and when does it get charged?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Get the booster club to buy a new van...........

Join AAA.

[red]

Based on above discussion - grant them

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't believe that it is the same because there is no live ball time between when the request is made and when the time-out is granted. Both are occurring during the same dead ball period. That is the difference to me.

This is where it's not clear to me, because I don't see it as the same dead ball period. There's the dead ball period where the TO is originally granted (perhaps a violation). Then there's the dead ball period of the TO. There's the period within the TO where a sub cannot enter the game (after the first warning horn). Different dead ball periods that allow for different things to happen; for example, during the first dead ball period (after the violation is called), would you allow for players to sit on the bench? Of course, during the next dead ball period, when the first TO is granted, players can sit on the bench, but you wouldn't allow them to be anywhere on the floor like you would during the first dead ball period. Different dead ball periods, even though happening consecutively. Just like two TO's - it's not the same TO period, it's two different TO periods happening consecutively.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

He asked for two. He gets two. If he is ready early and so is the other team, then we can short the second one and resume play, but it is still being charged. Too late to change his mind.

So, if a coach asks for a TO on the made FT (which is requested and granted during a dead ball period), then they change their mind after the made FT, would you still grant it/charge it? What rule/case play backs you up either way?

Again, there seems to be a chance for problems that could be avioded by simply making sure the request for the second TO happens during a period after the first TO is done. For me, that could simply be a nod from the huddle that yes, they do want that second TO.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

This is where it's not clear to me, because I don't see it as the same dead ball period. There's the dead ball period where the TO is originally granted (perhaps a violation). Then there's the dead ball period of the TO. There's the period within the TO where a sub cannot enter the game (after the first warning horn). Different dead ball periods that allow for different things to happen; for example, during the first dead ball period (after the violation is called), would you allow for players to sit on the bench? Of course, during the next dead ball period, when the first TO is granted, players can sit on the bench, but you wouldn't allow them to be anywhere on the floor like you would during the first dead ball period. Different dead ball periods, even though happening consecutively. Just like two TO's - it's not the same TO period, it's two different TO periods happening consecutively.


So, if a coach asks for a TO on the made FT (which is requested and granted during a dead ball period), then they change their mind after the made FT, would you still grant it/charge it? What rule/case play backs you up either way?

Again, there seems to be a chance for problems that could be avioded by simply making sure the request for the second TO happens during a period after the first TO is done. For me, that could simply be a nod from the huddle that yes, they do want that second TO.

I believe in the rules its states that anything not covered in the rules is up to the discretion of the Referee or something to that face. Dont have my rule books here.