Interesting situation

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The HC doesn't have to lie/cheat at all. He just doesn't get specific.

"To lie, cheat or deceive, leave out facts or tell half truths, it's all the same. You're an idiot if you think you're smarter than me?" - Judge Judy

I love that ol' lady

[Nevadaref]

Given that the VAST majority of people who serve as scorers and timers are not well-versed in the rules, it is quite reasonable to expect that such a situation is not going to follow perfect protocol.

The coach is probably just going to tell the guy at the table, "Give me a time-out." After that things are likely to follow different paths. Some scorers/timers are going to ignore the coach, some won't know what to do at all, and some will try to get the attention of an official.

IMO once the official learns of the situation, it seems that the ONLY reasonable course of action is to grant the time-out request. As I wrote before, it was being requested at a proper time and by a proper individual.
I still think that anyone who wants to make a big deal out of a HC getting a time-out in this manner is missing the big picture and being small and petty.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since the table personnel doesn't know why the HC is requesting the time-out through them, they would have to assume it is being done under 2-10 and follow that procedure--

I'm sure if you asked the average person who works the table what "2-10" is they'd say "ten minutes after two o'clock?". I would bet they'd think "2-10" has as much to do with basketball as "1 Adam 12".

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I'm sure if you asked the average person who works the table what "2-10" is they'd say "ten minutes after two o'clock?". I would bet they'd think "2-10" has as much to do with basketball as "1 Adam 12".

Precisely the point that I just made, yet many people seem to be jumping on the poor timer here for trying to do what he thought was helpful and right.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

...
I still think that anyone who wants to make a big deal out of a HC getting a time-out in this manner is missing the big picture and being small and petty.

The debate is not about granting the time-out, it's about the timer's actions. Keep the story straight if you are going to start name-calling.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The debate is not about granting the time-out, it's about the timer's actions. Keep the story straight if you are going to start name-calling.

as far as i can tell, the name calling started yesterday at 3:50 (post 14)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

as far as i can tell, the name calling started yesterday at 3:50 (post 14)

I think the cowardly comment is a running joke.

[JugglingReferee]

So the visiting coach knows that it is improper for him to get the timer to buzz for his timeout request that the officials haven't seen, and so therefore he doesn't do it.

But the home coach does get the timers to buzz the horn. The whole premise of fairness is that each team has equal opportunities. There's no way I'm granting this timeout request, and if I do, home HC also gets a technical foul for over-stepping his bounds (2-3). If early in the game, I can see giving a warning.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

as far as i can tell, the name calling started yesterday at 3:50 (post 14)

As far as I can tell, the name-calling started several months ago.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

As far as I can tell, the name-calling started several months ago.

Yes, there's that, too.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes, there's that, too.

OK, Bob...I will leave it alone now. Or at least try my best to do so.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The action that the timer undertook was perfectly reasonable. If I were a game official, I wouldn't have any problem with it. The HC was making a time-out request at a proper time and deserved to have it granted.

Please note that the HC can go to the table and request a time-out any time that he wishes and challenge a situation as a correctable error or a scoring or timing mistake. When the HC makes such a request the timer/scorer is to signal the officials as soon as that team is in control of the ball or the ball next becomes dead.
If the HC is incorrect about the error, his team gets charged with a time-out and they are permitted to utilize any remaining time after the determination regarding the error is made.
So all that the HC had to say in the situation presented by the OP is that he asked the table for a time-out because he could not get that attention of any of the game officials and that he thought that there might have been a timing (or other) error. At the point when an official comes over he just agrees that there wasn't an error and gets charged with the time-out, which is what he wanted.

2-11-3 The scorer shall: . . . Signal the officials by using the game horn or a sounding device
unlike that used by the referee and umpire(s). This may be used immediately if,
or as soon as, the ball is dead or is in control of the offending team.

5-8-4 . . . Responds to the scorer’s signal to grant a coach’s request that a
correctable error, as in 2-10, or a timing, scoring or alternating-possession
mistake be prevented or rectified. The appeal to the official shall be presented at the scorer’s table where a coach of each team may be present.

10-5-1c. The head coach may stand and/or leave the coaching box to confer with
personnel at the scorer’s table to request a time-out as in 5-8-4.

I am only online for a few minutes tonight guys, so here is my two cents:

NevadaRef has quoted the three rules that apply to this situation and the Official Timer (OT)was incorrect in sounding his horn to get the Game Officials (GO)attention so that the Head Coach could request a team timeout that is not covered by R5-S8-A4 and R10-S5-A1c. The bigger problem, as I see it, is that once the GO are made aware as to why the OT sounded his horn, does the GO grant the HC's request for a TO, assuming that he requests one for the GO once the GO gets to the Scorer's Table (ST) or does he tell the HC he can not have one because of the OT overstepped his bounds as the Timer?

MTD, Sr.

P.S. Have fun beating this dead horse some more.

[icallfouls]

Here is a link to the NFHS - Instructions to Scorers and Timers

http://www.nfhs.org/core/contentmana...rerstimers.pdf

Clearly the Table Crew (usually also part of the Home Team) overstepped their authority. The home team received an unintended benefit of having the game at home.

If the officials recognize the horn, the home team has clearly benefited from the stoppage in play. They have an opportunity to communicate enough to set up an offensive or defensive play. At that point, is it an inadvertant whistle? Now the coach is asking for the TO and if the officials do not recognize it they will have other problems with whoever their assigning authority is. Damned if you do, damned it you don't now.

[Mark Padgett]

I think what we have here is a technical foul on the table crew. The gym custodian should get two free throws and then be awarded one of the cheerleaders at the mid court line opposite the table. The table crew loses all concession stand privileges and must spend all subsequent timeouts refilling mechanical pencils.

I'm pretty sure all this is specified under NF rule 11.