Time Out
 

First half of a girls game and the coach yells in the officials ear for a time out. Without thinking the official blows his whistle to stop play, and then realizes that the coach who ask for the time out didn't have possession of the ball.

According to the case book *5.8.3 "....Team B is entitled to use the time-out since it was requested and granted: once granted it cannot be revoked and is charged to Team B."

My question is was the time out "Granted" by simply blowing your whistle?

When you blow the whistle, the ball becomes dead. You have no other choice but to.

To play devil's advocate... upon blowing whistle and recognizing the fact could you rule an inadvertant whistle?

Yes, you technical rule inadvertent whistle and then you grant the timeout. But it's typically wrapped into one.

-Josh

MOFFICIAL:

To answer your question:

NFHS: NO


NCAA: YES

MTD, Sr.

Doesn't matter, because now the ball is dead and either coach may request a TO. Either the coach still wants it, so you give it to him; or he was just trying to stop the clock, don't reward this by stopping the clock and not charging him with a TO.

That is what we thought as well....what would prevent a coach from trying that tactic again if they weren't charged a time out. Obviously a Technical foul if they abused that rule, but I feel that when the whistle blows you are awarding that team a time out even if it is erroneously awarded.

This is undeniably true. Yet, for me it revives the question of when the timeout is actually granted. Example: The accepted practice is to grant a timeout when the request is made by a player going out of bounds, even though the whistle does not blow until after the player lands. An editorial change, perhaps a definition of when a timeout is "granted" would be nice.

Actually, 5.8.3 Sit E covers this exactly. Once the TO is erroneously granted, it is charged to the team and it cannot be revoked. Iow, you don't get a chance to ask the coach if they still want the TO; it's been granted.

Since it is also an inadvertant whistle situation, the ball will be put back in play using POI. If there was team control, the ball is given back the team last in control. If it was during a FT or throw-in, the ball will be put back in play that way. If there was no team control, then AP is used.

I know this because I own this rule. :(

I know this, I was just talking through the logic of not giving him an option.

I mentioned this a couple of years ago:

Had a coach who requested a TO when the opposing team had the ball at its disposal for a end-line throw-in after a successful free throw (and subs). I bone-headedly blew my whistle. As I should I granted his time-out. After the game the coach told me he had done this in other games but I was the first official to enforce the TO. He said in the previous games he would use the momemtary interruption to set up his press.

Inadverdent Whistle on Time Out
 

The scenario we are discussing is: A whistle was blown with Team B dribbling in the backcourt with no real "play" occuring. The official clearly had not granted the time out; he raised his arm with the whistle and before awarding Team A the time out; play stopped. He had two options: Award the time out to Team A or declare "inadvertant whistle"... In my conversations, in polling fellow officials:

It seems the jury is still out; but the ones I have polled said that judgement is huge here. But, inadvertant whistles are part of the game; and that as long as, the pace of play was slow; to use inadvertant whistle. If we blow the whistle during a "play" you will probably have to award the time out and 'suffer the consequences"; but as a whole, the officials I have talked with are not "definitive" in they're opinions.

They should be, the case play is clear. By blowing the whistle for a timeout request, you are granting the timeout.

If the coach requested a TO, and the official blows the whistle to stop play, that official has granted the TO. There is no judgement on this play; the case play is clear that the TO is granted, and it is also an inadvertant whistle. The judgement comes in as to the official not being aware of the situation and blowing the whistle in that case, especially if "the pace of play was slow". If the coach is requesting a TO when they are not entitled to one, the official should simply not blow the whistle, or tell the coach they are not entitled to one at that point.

Simply calling an inadvertant whistle and not granting the TO is setting aside a rule to avoid embarrasment by the official. Too bad - the official should be aware of the game situation and not acknowledged the request in the first place.

I hate disagreeing with a fellow Cub fan, though. :)

Try this. If you blow the whistle, the coach gets the timeout. Now that the ball is dead, ask the coach if he wants a timeout "now". If he says yes, that's his second request and you give him two timeouts and charge him for two. Since he never said "30", he gets charged for two fulls. The best part would be if the first one was his last and now he gets a T for the second.

Yeah - try that. I dare ya'.