Interesting Technical Situation

[walter]

The C sounded his whistle, beckoned the sub, and was holding up play. It is not clear from the OP whether he had his hand in the air or not. Either way, if I'm the C, as soon as I see the ball in play, I'm blowing the whistle hard, resetting everything, and then playing on. To me a "T" here is wrong. I do not see this as 6 participating and can easily differentiate those situations from the OP. I agree 2-3 can be a dangerous and slippery slope but here the C obviously was not ready for play to resume.

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

I had this exact situation in my game last week. I was in C standing at mid court holding my hand up to stop play as I turned and watched the replace player begin to trot to the bench at the other end of the court. As he passed me I watched him and then looked to the end line where my partner had just put the ball in play. My partner looked at the player trotting off the court, then looked at me with my hand up. No one said a word, except in the locker room where my partner apologized for not seeing my hand up. We couldn't justify giving the team a T for our mistake.

If my partner would have acted like he was going to I would have blown my whistle and come in and emphatically informed him of the entire situation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree that's the penalty if a T is assessed.

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

Exactly!

[Back In The Saddle]

IMHO, this is a crew screw up. The players did everything right. If there's a T, it's a team T on the crew. There is no way the crew can justify a T on the substituting team here.

One of the realities of officiating is that there is (almost) always a correct way to do something, and a (sometimes) a right way to do it. The difference between a really good official and a great one is the ability to do the right things when required. Doing that absolutely requires knowing the correct way. It also requires the ability to discern when the correct thing is the wrong thing. Then you need to have the stones, presence, credibility and people skills to pull it off.

But this OP is really simple and routine. It is each official's responsibility to ensure this never happens. All three officials screwed this up.

[Ignats75]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

IMHO, this is a crew screw up. The players did everything right. If there's a T, it's a team T on the crew. There is no way the crew can justify a T on the substituting team here.

One of the realities of officiating is that there is (almost) always a correct way to do something, and a (sometimes) a right way to do it. The difference between a really good official and a great one is the ability to do the right things when required. Doing that absolutely requires knowing the correct way. It also requires the ability to discern when the correct thing is the wrong thing. Then you need to have the stones, presence, credibility and people skills to pull it off.

But this OP is really simple and routine. It is each official's responsibility to ensure this never happens. All three officials screwed this up.

Bravo!

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Exactly!

Ditto.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree that's the penalty if a T is assessed.

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

The ball becomes live on the throw-in when the administering official, the T in this case, places it at the disposal of the thrower. That's the rule. This has nothing to do with what the C or L are doing. The C can't prevent the ball from becoming live if the T puts it in play. The best that the C can do is blow the whistle as he observes the T handing the ball to the thrower, at any point after that, it is too late.

The crew screwed up. The team gets penalized. No one likes it, including me, but that's how the rules work. We don't get to set them aside when we don't like them.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The ball becomes live on the throw-in when the administering official, the T in this case, places it at the disposal of the thrower. That's the rule. This has nothing to do with what the C or L are doing. The C can't prevent the ball from becoming live if the T puts it in play. The best that the C can do is blow the whistle as he observes the T handing the ball to the thrower, at any point after that, it is too late.

The crew screwed up. The team gets penalized. No one likes it, including me, but that's how the rules work. We don't get to set them aside when we don't like them.

I disagree. The ball is not live if I (as an official) want it dead. If I observe a foul, but drop my whistle, the ball is dead even if it takes me 5 seconds to blow the whistle.

Same here. I'm C. T administers the throw-in, it is still dead if I'm standing in the middle of the court, because, as an official, I have called the play dead. By your reasoning, the second T hands the ball to the thrower, it's too late. Even if I hit my whistle three times before he hands the ball. Because, by your reasoning, if he doesn't hear it and goes ahead and administers the throw-in, it's live.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I disagree. The ball is not live if I (as an official) want it dead. If I observe a foul, but drop my whistle, the ball is dead even if it takes me 5 seconds to blow the whistle.

Same here. I'm C. T administers the throw-in, it is still dead if I'm standing in the middle of the court, because, as an official, I have called the play dead. By your reasoning, the second T hands the ball to the thrower, it's too late. Even if I hit my whistle three times before he hands the ball. Because, by your reasoning, if he doesn't hear it and goes ahead and administers the throw-in, it's live.

Got a rules citation to back up your disagreement?

It is true that a foul or violation makes the ball dead, not the officials whistle per a rules fundamental, but the play which we are discussing here is going in the reverse direction.

We are talking rules here, not opinions.

[jdw3018]

No citation. Just the common sense that says while I am conducting an administrative procedure in which the ball is dead that another official handing the ball to a player isn't administering the throw in, it's simply handing a dead ball to a player.

If I grant a timeout just as an official is handing the ball to a player, but don't blow my whistle immediately, the ball never became live. In this instance, even though I didn't blow my whistle as the T is handing the ball, it never became live because I blew it dead again (even though I didn't blow my whistle right away).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

No citation. Just the common sense that says while I am conducting an administrative procedure in which the ball is dead that another official handing the ball to a player isn't administering the throw in, it's simply handing a dead ball to a player.

If I grant a timeout just as an official is handing the ball to a player, but don't blow my whistle immediately, the ball never became live. In this instance, even though I didn't blow my whistle as the T is handing the ball, it never became live because I blew it dead again (even though I didn't blow my whistle right away).

That's what I thought. Someone on the crew screwed up and you aren't happy about it, so you don't wish to follow the written rules and enforce the prescribed penalty. You can make all of the excuses that you want to justify doing whatever you wish, but the bottom line is that you are simply refusing to handle this by the book.

If you are comfortable telling your assignor that, then that's fine. It's up to you.
Personally, I don't like screw-ups by the crew either, but when they happen, I'm d@mn sure going to follow the rules in dealing with them.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

No citation. Just the common sense that says while I am conducting an administrative procedure in which the ball is dead that another official handing the ball to a player isn't administering the throw in, it's simply handing a dead ball to a player.

If I grant a timeout just as an official is handing the ball to a player, but don't blow my whistle immediately, the ball never became live. In this instance, even though I didn't blow my whistle as the T is handing the ball, it never became live because I blew it dead again (even though I didn't blow my whistle right away).

Here is the problem with your way of thinking and handling such a situation.
If you don't use the moment that the administering official places the ball at the disposal of the thrower, making it live per 6-1-2b, as your point of no return and determination of when team members are "participating" (as defined by the NFHS in 10.5.3), then you have absolutely no standard by which to decide when it is too late to cancel all of the action.

To further make my point, consider the following:
Would you assess a T if the mistake was caught while:
a. the thrower was holding the ball and yet to attempt to pass it inbounds
b. the thrower had passed the ball, but no inbounds player had yet to touch it
c. the throw-in pass had been caught inbounds by a teammate of the thrower
d. the throw-in pass had been caught inbounds by an opponent of the thrower
e. the throw-in pass had been caught inbounds by A2 and he had not yet dribbled
f. same as e, except now the player had dribbled for 2 seconds
g. same as f, except make it eight seconds
h. play continued for only four seconds, but a player committed a foul
i. play continued for ten seconds and a goal was scored by the team with six team members on the floor.
j. same as i, but it took only two seconds for Team A to score a goal

Where do you draw the line, if you don't follow the rules book and the case book?

[Forksref]

2-3 doesn't apply because there ARE rules that cover this situation.

Administer the T and hopefully, the crew and the players and the coach will do better next time.

Beckon, wait... and COUNT.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by nevadaref

the ball becomes live on the throw-in when the administering official, the t in this case, places it at the disposal of the thrower. That's the rule. This has nothing to do with what the c or l are doing. The c can't prevent the ball from becoming live if the t puts it in play. The best that the c can do is blow the whistle as he observes the t handing the ball to the thrower, at any point after that, it is too late.

The crew screwed up. The team gets penalized. No one likes it, including me, but that's how the rules work. We don't get to set them aside when we don't like them.

a2d