Consecutive Time-out

[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.