Timeout, inadvertent whistle situation

[jTheUmp]

Thanks for the responses, everyone.

To be honest, I'm not sure if the TO was requested before the ball was stolen or not... I was on the the endline.

So if the TO request happens before the steal, call the TO.

If the TO request happens AFTER the steal and my partner blows his whistle for the TO, then we have an IW situation, correct?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

Thanks for the responses, everyone.

To be honest, I'm not sure if the TO was requested before the ball was stolen or not... I was on the the endline.

So if the TO request happens before the steal, call the TO.

If the TO request happens AFTER the steal and my partner blows his whistle for the TO, then we have an IW situation, correct?

You have not read all the responses if your are still asking this question.

[jTheUmp]

Yep, I missed a couple of responses while I was typing my first reply. (*facepalm*)

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

So if the TO request happens before the steal, call the TO.

Yes.

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

If the TO request happens AFTER the steal and my partner blows his whistle for the TO, then we have an IW situation, correct?

No

5.8.3 situation E

A1 is dribbling the ball in his/her backcourt when: (a) the Team B head coach requests and is erroneously granted a time-out by an official: or (b) the Team A head coach is yelling "side out" offensive instructions to his/her team and the official stops play believing the coach requested a time-out.

RULING:
In (a), Team B is entitled to use the time-out since it was requested and granted: once granted it cannot be revoked and is charged to Team B. All privileges and rights permitted during a charged time-out are available to both teams. Play will resume with a Team A throw-in nearest to where play was stopped.

In (b), and accidental whistle has occurred. Team A was not requesting a time-out and therefore, should not be granted or charged with one. Play is resumed at the point of interruption (4-36-1; 4-36-2a)

[grunewar]

The other night, B15U Rec league. I'm T during foul shots.

A1 sinks last of two free-throws. As I move down the court to be the new L, B Coach says to me, "I want a timeout when the ball comes across half court."

"You got it coach."

As B1 dribbles to the Division Line he sees B2 along the end-line and throws a half-court pass to B2 about 10 feet from the basket. No one is between him and the basket......

TWEEEET! Time out, B!

I know the coaches intent was - as soon as his player crossed the division line under pressure, but..... he requested it and it was granted.

[mbyron]

Three distinct events:
1. Coach requests time out.
2. Official grants time out.
3. Official signals time out by blowing whistle.

3 always happens after 2, though the time lag varies. If I find myself in a situation where I hit the whistle as a steal is in progress, I tell the aggrieved coach "I'd already granted the time out request, coach."

They hear the other coach's request, and they want that time out granted when their kid has the ball. I don't get much flak about it.

[Rich]

I've noticed a serious amount of whining about this from "aggrieved" coaches the last couple of weeks. Loose ball situation, kid retrieves ball on the ground, coach quickly requests time, we grant it.

Coach either claims the ball was loose or tied up and we shouldn't have granted it.

Personally, I don't care and expect the whining, but so much focus on a second quarter possession makes no sense to me. Why waste the timeout? Why waste breath wanting to argue something like this?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I've noticed a serious amount of whining about this from "aggrieved" coaches the last couple of weeks. Loose ball situation, kid retrieves ball on the ground, coach quickly requests time, we grant it.

Coach either claims the ball was loose or tied up and we shouldn't have granted it.

Personally, I don't care and expect the whining, but so much focus on a second quarter possession makes no sense to me. Why waste the timeout? Why waste breath wanting to argue something like this?

Like when an NFL calls a time-out to avoid a DOG penalty on 3rd and 13?

[StripesOhio]

I had a similar situation but I granted the timeout.

A1 gathers a loose ball near the division line and has possession. I am right next to the coach who starts yelling timeout. As I processed I was ready to grant the timeout A1 lost possession of the ball.

By the time I blew the whistle the appearance was he lost control of the ball. But I granted the timeout (in my head) before this happened.

Nobody complained either way.

Some have to realize that just because the whistle is late doesn't mean the call is wrong (or blown). Officials are human to and immediately blowing the whistle for something isn't going to happen.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Three distinct events:
1. Coach requests time out.
2. Official grants time out.
3. Official signals time out by blowing whistle.

3 always happens after 2, though the time lag varies. If I find myself in a situation where I hit the whistle as a steal is in progress, I tell the aggrieved coach "I'd already granted the time out request, coach."

They hear the other coach's request, and they want that time out granted when their kid has the ball. I don't get much flak about it.

Nope. #2 and #3 happen at the same time. You have no rules support for your nice little schema. You may desire it to work that way, but according to the rules it doesn't. The ball isn't dead in your step #2. The ball becomes dead in #3 when the whistle blows. The defender made a good steal and your method screws him out of it. The coach wasn't quick enough in making his time-out request. That's all.

I hope that you don't go back and put an extra two seconds on the clock to reflect the time between when you "granted" the time-out before the opponent stole the ball and when you sounded your whistle.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Nope. #2 and #3 happen at the same time. You have no rules support for your nice little schema. You may desire it to work that way, but according to the rules it doesn't. The ball isn't dead in your step #2. The ball becomes dead in #3 when the whistle blows. The defender made a good steal and your method screws him out of it. The coach wasn't quick enough in making his time-out request. That's all.

I hope that you don't go back and put an extra two seconds on the clock to reflect the time between when you "granted" the time-out before the opponent stole the ball and when you sounded your whistle.

It takes two seconds for you to whistle after deciding to grant a time out?! Wow!

As a matter of fact there's a time differential between deciding to grant a time out and putting air in your whistle. I'm talking a tenth of a second or less. The rules fail to address this gap.

IMO, and in actual practice in my area, the time out should be granted when the team in possession loses the ball during that gap.

FWIW, you have no rules backing for your opinion either.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Nope. #2 and #3 happen at the same time. You have no rules support for your nice little schema. You may desire it to work that way, but according to the rules it doesn't. The ball isn't dead in your step #2. The ball becomes dead in #3 when the whistle blows.

No rules support? The ball isn't dead?

I respectfully beg to differ, Mr. CumquatHead.

Basketball Rules Fundamental #16: - "The official's whistle seldom causes the ball to become dead(it is already dead)."

The ball was dead when the official granted the TO request. And golly-gee, I think that there's a rule that backs that statement up also:
Rule 5-8-3:- "Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official GRANTS a player/head coach's oral or visual request for a time-out.."

What happened after you granted the time-out is part of that time-out.

Rules rulz!!