For the sake of discussion let's just take the horn out of it altogether. Let's assume that rather than a second left there are 5 seconds left when A inbounds and the official notices that the clock started while the ball is sailing through the air to nobody and towards out of bounds. Again in this case the play that Nevada sites would have you give the ball back to A due to the timing error. I don't like it one bit, but I believe the case play supports it.

The flaw in your logic is that this is the period-ending horn sounding. This specific signal is the one used by the timer to indicate the expiration of playing time in a quarter or extra period. It is unique in the rules and cannot be ignored. The significance of its sounding is not akin to that of the scorer signaling the officials for their attention to some matter such as subs, a player illegally in the game, a scoring error, etc.

The way that you have designed this scenario, it would only be true that Team A would have to be given the ball back and the clock reset, IF an official sounded his whistle to interrupt the game action. That is because the game would have to resume at the point of interruption and that point occurred during a throw-in for Team A.

However, if the official was able to allow the throw-in to finish and the violation to occur before the horn and without having to sound his whistle, then the clock could be reset and the ball could be awarded to Team B. The timing error was properly noticed by the official and there was definite knowledge to fix it, but play was not interrupted and the game action which took place stands. Consider this case book ruling, which does NOT state to negate the throw-in or the subsequent violation and award the ball back to Team A.

5.10.1 SITUATION D: There are six seconds left on the clock in the fourth quarter
and the ball is out of bounds in the possession of Team A. The throw-in by A1
touches the referee on the court and then goes across the court and out of
bounds. The timer permits two seconds to run off the clock. What recourse does
the coach of either team have in such situation? RULING: Either coach may step
to the scorer’s table and request a 60-second time-out and have the referee come
to the table. The coach is permitted to do this under provisions of the coach’s
rule. The referee shall come to the sideline and confer with one or both coaches
and the timer about the matter; and if the referee has definite knowledge that
there were six seconds on the clock when the ball was awarded to Team A for the
throw-in, it is the responsibility of the referee to have the two seconds put back
on the clock. The timer and scorer and the other official(s) can be used by the
referee to gain definite information. If there is no mistake or if it cannot be
rectified, the requesting team will be charged with a 60-second time-out. (5-11-
3 Exception b; 5-8-4; 10-5-1c)

I was R on a game earlier in the year with a combination of these two instances. 1.2 seconds left in 3rd period, close game. Team A with throw-in under opponent's basket. Threw a deep pass that headed out of bounds untouched. Whistle sounded for violation immediately before/simultaneous with horn sounding.

Obviously we put 1.2 back on the clock. We then awarded B the throw-in at the original spot due to the throw-in violation.

Only real question was whether the violation occurred before the horn sounded. Calling official confirmed it did. Pretty easy administration, and both coaches even understood and accepted the explanation. ;)

I also tried to respond yesterday and got an error, didn't come back to post it again:

One of the things to remember about this ruling and its relation to "fairness" is that, like many other corrections of errors (including correctable errors), one team is often going to end up feeling shafted. It's often going to make an official feel as if the rule they must enforce is unfair for the situation.

But...there is no way to know which team is getting shafted until the error actually occurs. Perhaps A has broken free in this situation for an easy layup and clear game winner when the horn sounds early. A gets hosed. Perhaps A is in the process of clearly throwing the ball away and now they get to try again. B gets hosed.

The rules can't be written to be applied differently in these situations, and thus "it is what it is." Correctable errors are enforced in such a way that both teams have incentive to have the errors corrected before they occur. Bookkeeping and timing errors may seem to benefit one team if they aren't corrected, but can have significant negative impact on that team if discovered and corrected later.

So, we have what is a very clear way to correct regrettable situations. You just have to accept that many times, one team is going to feel it was unfair.

Good call. You'd just have to hope that the official would not blow the whistle out of habit/inadvertently/whatever you want to call it upon seeing the clock starting pre-maturely....which is why it is best to have a slow whistle:)