Tough situation my partner put us in

[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?

[rsl]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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?

In 8.6.1, It is not clear the ball was ever live. The referee said two shots, so one interpretation is that when B1 grabbed the rebound he was just grabbing a dead ball. The referee said two shots, so the ball was dead. Another interpretation is that there should have been one shot, so it should be live. In this case, the ref's error actually put the live/dead ball status in question.

I think the first interp is correct, since it consistent with both the case play and 4-36.

And frankly, other than both involve a ref error, I think it is a stretch to quote 8.6.1 in the context of the OP

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rsl

In 8.6.1, It is not clear the ball was ever live. The referee said two shots, so one interpretation is that when B1 grabbed the rebound he was just grabbing a dead ball. The referee said two shots, so the ball was dead. Another interpretation is that there should have been one shot, so it should be live. In this case, the ref's error actually put the live/dead ball status in question.

I think the first interp is correct, since it consistent with both the case play and 4-36.

And frankly, other than both involve a ref error, I think it is a stretch to quote 8.6.1 in the context of the OP

If both teams played the rebound, the ball is considered live. So that interpretation is not accurate.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If both teams played the rebound, the ball is considered live. So that interpretation is not accurate.

Well, that's covered in 8.6.1(c), and the reason they continue to play is because the players were not affected by the official's erroneous information and played the ball correctly.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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?

8.6.1 is a published ruling by the NFHS committee telling one how to handle a specific mistake by an official of verbally misinforming the players. That is the ruling which tells one to kill the play while the ball is in team control and use the AP arrow.
There is no such ruling for an inadvertent/accidental whistle as in the OP. Therefore, one needs to follow the rules. It is not the job of the game official to set aside the rules whenever he feels that they are unfair. The rule writers determine what is fair and set down the rules according to that. We are not to override their judgment. If a rule creates a poor outcome, then people will work to have it changed. Until then, it needs to be followed.

Sorry, but what you are advocating doing here is inappropriate.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Sorry, but what you are advocating doing here is inappropriate.

...and so was WATERBOARDING...but, we got the desired results.

[just another ref]

Where is the definition of inadvertent/accidental whistle? As far as I know, there is not one. Does one official stop the game and try to talk his partner out of every bad violation call that he sees? This is a bad call, and everybody knows it, or should know it. It is only an accidental whistle if the officials choose to say so after the fact. But it is a bad call which produces at least part of the correct result. (blue gets the ball, but according to the op, should have had a layup) Let the bad call stand. Give the ball to blue. Move on.