Help with a rule citation?

[CoachCER]

We had a situation in the semis of my 7th-8th grade rec league today and it is one of times when I am certain of the rule, but I can't find my rulebook to verify the ruling.

Team A is inbounding on the sideline with 3 seconds to go, down by 3 after a traveling violation on Team B.
The coach of Team A requests and is granted a time out.
After the time out, Team A lines up to inbound the ball, sees the alignment of the defense, and requests another time out.

At this point, the coach of Team B begins to have kittens, insisting that time outs can never be called back to back, and that Team A should receive a technical.

The ruling from the official who started to grant the time out request was that time outs can not be called back to back on a deadball, and that he wasn't granting the request. The ball was then put into play by Team A.

Now my understanding is that the second time out request by Team A was legal, and could be granted.

I discussed this with both officials after the game, and one believed the request was legal, while the one who denied the request (a solid guy, does some varsity ball) decided that maybe he braincramped and did deny a legal request for a time out. I will say this was at the end of a long day for both refs, and I think we were all fuzzy brained at the end.

If this is the case, could someone provide me the NFHS citation either way? I know I have made the same request as a coach without an issue, and I just want to double check.

[just another ref]

4-43-2: A successive time-out is one which is granted to either team before the clock has started following the previous time-out.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by CoachCER

We had a situation in the semis of my 7th-8th grade rec league today and it is one of times when I am certain of the rule, but I can't find my rulebook to verify the ruling.

Team A is inbounding on the sideline with 3 seconds to go, down by 3 after a traveling violation on Team B.
The coach of Team A requests and is granted a time out.
After the time out, Team A lines up to inbound the ball, sees the alignment of the defense, and requests another time out.

At this point, the coach of Team B begins to have kittens, insisting that time outs can never be called back to back, and that Team A should receive a technical.

The ruling from the official who started to grant the time out request was that time outs can not be called back to back on a deadball, and that he wasn't granting the request. The ball was then put into play by Team A.

Now my understanding is that the second time out request by Team A was legal, and could be granted.

I discussed this with both officials after the game, and one believed the request was legal, while the one who denied the request (a solid guy, does some varsity ball) decided that maybe he braincramped and did deny a legal request for a time out. I will say this was at the end of a long day for both refs, and I think we were all fuzzy brained at the end.

If this is the case, could someone provide me the NFHS citation either way? I know I have made the same request as a coach without an issue, and I just want to double check.

Here is the definition of time-outs (and successive time-outs) and who can take them and when:
4-43 TIME-OUT
ART. 1 . . . A 60-second time-out charged to a team is a maximum of one
minute in length. A 30-second time-out charged to a team is a maximum 30
seconds in length.
ART. 2 . . . A successive time-out is one which is granted to either team before the clock has started following the previous time-out.

The ONLY time successive time-outs are not permitted is at the expiration of regulation or any OT period per......
5-12-3. . . Successive time-outs shall not be granted after expiration of playing time for the fourth quarter or any extra period.

[Nevadaref]

Others have already provided the proper NFHS rules references for you, but in plain English here is what you need to know.

With 3 seconds remaining in the quarter, there is no restriction on how many time-outs either or both teams may request and be granted and the official should have granted your request.

Following the expiration of time in the 4th quarter or any extra period, only one time-out by either team is permitted. Once that time-out is over neither team can take another one until the ball becomes live in the next period of play, if there is one.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Others have already provided the proper NFHS rules references for you, but in plain English here is what you need to know.

With 3 seconds remaining in the quarter, there is no restriction on how many time-outs either or both teams may request and be granted and the official should have granted your request.

Following the expiration of time in the 4th quarter or any extra period, only one time-out by either team is permitted. Once that time-out is over neither team can take another one until the ball becomes live in the next period of play, if there is one.

If there isn't one, how did you grant even one time-out?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If there isn't one, how did you grant even one time-out?

Time may have expired in the period, but there may still be game activity to be completed.
For example, a player may have been fouled while attempting a try and time expired while the try was in flight. We now have a situation in which a player will attempt FTs after the expiration of time in the quarter. The score may be tied or this team may be trailing (the game would be over if this team is ahead), but as long as the score is close enough for the FTs to possibly make a difference in the outcome they must be attempted. The outcome of the FTs will determine whether there is another period of play.

The opposing coach may wish to take a time-out in an attempt to "ice" this shooter. The rule is in place to prevent that coach from taking multiple time-outs in a row to really "freeze" this shooter.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Time may have expired in the period, but there may still be game activity to be completed.
For example, a player may have been fouled while attempting a try and time expired while the try was in flight. We now have a situation in which a player will attempt FTs after the expiration of time in the quarter. The score may be tied or this team may be trailing (the game would be over if this team is ahead), but as long as the score is close enough for the FTs to possibly make a difference in the outcome they must be attempted. The outcome of the FTs will determine whether there is another period of play.

I am educated. I had always read this to say the end of the period, as opposed to the expiration of time in the period.

The opposing coach may wish to take a time-out in an attempt to "ice" this shooter. The rule is in place to prevent that coach from taking multiple time-outs in a row to really "freeze" this shooter.

Is this your theory, (I can't think of another) or is this published somewhere?
A coach would rather use multiple time-outs here than save them for use in a potential next period where they might be crucial? Seems unlikely.