How would you handle?
 

Late in the game (under 10 seconds) ... Team A is behind and scores a basket to pull within 4.

While B1 has the ball and looking to inbound A1 signals for a timeout. Nothing granted. A1 again signals for a TO and even is heard saying "timeout!"

Team A did not have any TOs left. The official (did not know team A was out of TOs) granted the TO granted the second request.

Question: If you knew Team A did not have any TOs left, do you grant the timeout? And obviously know this will be a tech on Team A or do you just continue play?

In this case the official would have been correct to ignore the request as it was not made at a proper time.

If they can't legally request a timeout at the time, why would you grant it?

I don't care if I know if they have timeouts left or not, I'm not granting anything, no matter what they request, when B is holding the ball on an inbounds play.

That clears that up. B1 had the ball at his disposal for a throw in.

What if the ball has just went through the hoop and Team B has yet to gain control?

Is it our responsibility to keep track of the teams' timeout situation? In my opinion it's not, but others may think otherwise.

As I put myself in your shoes, and if Team A was requesting the timeout at a proper time, I would grant it, and they'd have to deal with the penalty.

2001-02 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 12: Team A has used all allotted time-outs. The scorer notifies the referee, who properly advises the Team A coach at the beginning of Team A’s last called time-out. During play later in the game, A4 attempts to call time-out when he/she is being pressured by B2 and 83. U2 ignores the request by A4. RULING: U2 should honor the request of A4, even when this would be a time-out in excess of the number allotted. Game officials do not have discretionary authority to assist players in avoiding rules violations. (2-7-6; 5-12-2)

So much for preventative officiating eh? ;)

Depends upon how you define "preventative officiating." In my opinion, too many people have perverted the term into something which it was never intended to be and use it as an excuse to not blow the whistle when they should.

This would actually be a good topic for another thread.

I agree with Nevada. The truly preventive part is advising the coach that they just used their last timeout. Beyond that, it's up to them - not our job to second guess their motives or intentions.

Back to the OP, I agree with others that timeout request by A should not have been granted regardless of A's timeout situation. Once B has the ball for inbound it's too late for a request by A.

NFHS -- Rule 2-11-6 -- Record the time-out information charged to each team (who and when) and notify a team and its coach, through an official, whenever that team is granted its final allotted charged time-out.

Right, but other than that I mean. I always get a kick when I ask a coach full or 30, and he looks at me and says "Well all I've got is fulls, isn't it?"

So count the 30s during the game! You can count to two for one team, right? Have your partner do the same for the other and communicate to each other when a team has used both of their 30s.

While he should have ignored the request due to the time it was requested, once the whistle was blown the timeout needs to be granted and the T called as well.

Coach may well be hoping you'll stop the clock and simply put the ball back in play once you realized B was not supposed to be able to request a timeout there.

No thanks. Right now I've got enough to think about during a game. At this point, my biggest concern with timeouts is remembering whose ball it is and where it's being put in play.