Tough situation my partner put us in

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Common sense? So what? Are you really saying you would make a ruling based on not wanting the blue team to get upset with you (and the crew)?

Do you have a rule reference?

So, here we go with the "common sense" vs. "rule" argument. Color me old and grumpy, but I see one major flaw with the argument. It goes completely against 4-36. Yep, one team got screwed out of a score because the official made the mistake of blowing the whistle when they should not have. Too bad - there's a rule to fix that. Once they feel the heat, I'll bet they don't do that again.

So, you give the ball to blue because they might get upset? If I'm white's coach, I'm really going to get upset that you're compounding a screwup with completely ignoring a specific rule. You're going to be getting heat one way or the other, so why not get it right one of those times? And if the heat's too bad, there's a rule to fix that as well.

Look, I understand the issue of rec leagues, camp situation etc. And, if the whistle happend so close to blue getting the ball, I would have no problem with blue ending up with possession. But as I read the OP, the whistle sounded well before blue ended up with it, so white still has team control, and white will have the throw-in.

Have a look at the case plays regarding an official incorrectly announcing the number of FTs. The rulings in these plays are not based on the rules. In fact, some of them technically contradict rules. But, the rulings are common sense and do the right thing.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Have a look at the case plays regarding an official incorrectly announcing the number of FTs. The rulings in these plays are not based on the rules. In fact, some of them technically contradict rules. But, the rulings are common sense and do the right thing.

The cases you mention involve correctable errors - a specific section of the rules. I can also show you a case play where the official gives the ball to the wrong team for a throw-in, and once the ball is inbounds, it's too late to correct - 7.5.2(a). Wouldn't it make "common sense" to stop play and give it back to the correct team? But we cannot, because it's not a correctable error.

The difference here is this play is not a correctable error, the whistle caused play to stop, and any ruling you make would be based on an assumption. You are assuming blue would catch the ball cleanly and not fumble it OOB. Would you also make the ruling blue would've made the easy layup? Why not save some time and just count the basket and give it back to white for the endline throw-in? How far ahead would you go to assume? The rule involving POI is pretty specific, and apparently doesn't need any additional case plays to expand.

Again, I understand the "theory" of trying to insert common sense into strange situations, and I would not object to giving it to blue if the whistle happened so close to the change of possession it would be hard to tell which happened first. Unfortunately, this is covered specifically in the rules, and doing something else would be a specific deviation from the rules.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

The cases you mention involve correctable errors - a specific section of the rules.

Actually, the case I'm referring to is not a correctable error (see below).

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I can also show you a case play where the official gives the ball to the wrong team for a throw-in, and once the ball is inbounds, it's too late to correct - 7.5.2(a). Wouldn't it make "common sense" to stop play and give it back to the correct team? But we cannot, because it's not a correctable error.

We have a specific case on that error. There is a window where the error is correctable...up to the point where the throwin has been completed (there is actually rules support that this is correctable and I've posted about that previously). This gives the team a chance to bring it to the official's attention. If not cut off at that point in time, how late would be too late?

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

The difference here is this play is not a correctable error, the whistle caused play to stop, and any ruling you make would be based on an assumption. You are assuming blue would catch the ball cleanly and not fumble it OOB.
...
The rule involving POI is pretty specific, and apparently doesn't need any additional case plays to expand.

See the following case...the whistle causes the play to stop in a non correctable error situation with one team in control of the ball and the ruling doesn't go with the POI.

Case Play 8.6.1

A1 is about to attempt the first of a one-and-one free throw situation. The administering official steps in and erroneously informs players that two shots will be taken. A1's first attempt is unsuccessful. The missed shot is rebounded by: (a)B1, with all other players motionless in anticipation of another throw....The officials recognize their error at this point.

Ruling: In (a) the officials error clearly put one team at a disadvantage.... Play should be whistled dead immediately and resumed using the alternating-possession procedure.

The only relevant rule says to give it to the team that was in control when the ball becomes dead. However, the ruling does not give the ball to the team that was in control at the time the ball became dead but goes to the AP arrow. It makes the assumption that, even though it is most likely, Team B may not have obtained the rebound. It does what is right...making the assumption that either team may have retreived the rebound...and goes to the AP arrow.

In the realm of official's errors, 8.6.1 sets the precedent for resuming in contradiction to what the rules support when one team clearly has gained an advantage through the officials error when the normal rules are followed.

Given that, in the OP, there was no way for team A to legally retrieve the ball, the precedent set by the above case supports, at a minimum, going to the arrow if not awarding the ball to the blue team.

[Nevadaref]

I disagree with your premise, Camron.
The reason that the ruling in 8.6.1 instructs the officials to use the arrow and states that the official put one team at a disadvantage is because of the official's verbal instruction to the players just prior to making the ball live. Players have the expectation that they can listen to and follow the referee's instructions. To penalize them for doing so would be improper.

However, in this backcourt scenario at no time does the referee instruct the players from one team to not go for the ball. All that he does is blow a whistle and stop play improperly. Neither team was put at a prior disadvantage. Therefore, your analogy doesn't hold water.

The backcourt play is no different than an official calling a traveling violation that wasn't there and taking the ball away from a team. It was just a bad whistle. Sometimes those happen. When they do, you follow the proper rules for the situation and move on with the game.

[M&M Guy]

Oh, crap...I agree with Nevada. Maybe I should reconsider?...

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Actually, the case I'm referring to is not a correctable error (see below).

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

See the following case...the whistle causes the play to stop in a non correctable error situation

Awarding an unmerited free throw certainly is one of the 5 correctable errors. And this case explains one of the ways to make the correction after discovering the correctable error.

You've made great arguments in favor of using common sense, but none of them are supported by rule. You have yet to give me any specific case play involving POI and accidental whistles that supports giving the ball to blue, only extrapolations from other areas of the rules. Common sense tells me that if I give A1 the ball for a throw-in, when B is entitled to the throw-in, I should be able to correct it as soon as I realize the mistake, even after the ball is inbounds. And I can find other areas of the rules that support making a correction when it's discovered, not just within certain time limits (such as correcting a score). But I would be going against a specific case to make that ruling. That's the same thing you are doing - you are extrapolating from other areas of the rules to support something that goes against a specific rule or case already in place. It's very clear in the OP the ball is awarded to the team last in control at the time of the accidental whistle, as per 4-36-2(a).

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Awarding an unmerited free throw certainly is one of the 5 correctable errors. And this case explains one of the ways to make the correction after discovering the correctable error.

All good, except for the fact that 8.6.1 is not a correctable error. The FT was never awarded...to be awarded, it has to be taken.

It does, however, provide a way to correct an officials error fairly when it is obvious that an officials error created a result that was not intended.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

You've made great arguments in favor of using common sense, but none of them are supported by rule. You have yet to give me any specific case play involving POI and accidental whistles that supports giving the ball to blue, only extrapolations from other areas of the rules. Common sense tells me that if I give A1 the ball for a throw-in, when B is entitled to the throw-in, I should be able to correct it as soon as I realize the mistake, even after the ball is inbounds.

Likewise, you've yet to provide ANY case that involves an inadvertant whistle anticipating a violation.

As for the throwin, it has to be cut-off at some point....up to the point where the ball is inbounds. If it were any later, you'd have some nasty situations that could result when the teams try to use such situations to thier advantage.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

And I can find other areas of the rules that support making a correction when it's discovered, not just within certain time limits (such as correcting a score). But I would be going against a specific case to make that ruling. That's the same thing you are doing - you are extrapolating from other areas of the rules to support something that goes against a specific rule or case already in place. It's very clear in the OP the ball is awarded to the team last in control at the time of the accidental whistle, as per 4-36-2(a).

I'm extrapolating from the principles established in other rules....that when an unusual official's error is made, correct it with fairness, even if the rules covering normal situations don't agree. 8.6.1 give us that thinking. That is the closest case we've got to the OP situation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm extrapolating from the principles established in other rules....that when an unusual official's error is made, correct it with fairness, even if the rules covering normal situations don't agree. 8.6.1 give us that thinking. That is the closest case we've got to the OP situation.

Nope, correct it according to the rules.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Nope, correct it according to the rules.

Then explain 8.6.1. What rule tells you to to the AP arrow when you kill the ball with it in team control and there is no infraction, end of period, or goal involved?