Timeout situation

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

I agree with SlowWhistle and Snaqs about making sure that it wasn't the HC that requested the TO. I would be very surprised if one of my partners came in to try and change my call in this situation.

But Snaqs, this situation is different from most situations where you have voiced your opinion about not getting charged the TO. In this sitch, the coach hasn't done anything that you are allowing him to benefit from. He was just standing there "minding his own business."

I agree with you about not letting them off the hook when the HC calls a TO without possession and is erroneously granted that TO. But I am not sure I agree in this sitch. IMO, I would consider it an IW and only grant a TO if either coach (or player) requested one.

Of course, I've had time to think about.

You're right. I don't like it, but you're right. This one is on the officials for granting a TO requested by the wrong person. This is one you just have to eat, I think, and if the coach doesn't want the TO, put it back in play POI.

[Adam]

BTW, judging from this thread and a few others, I think the NFHS needs to make POI a POE next year. Drive it home that an IW does not necessarily mean AP. Good grief.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

BTW, judging from this thread and a few others, I think the NFHS needs to make POI a POE next year. Drive it home that an IW does not necessarily mean AP. Good grief.

+1

I can't remember who's byline it is but I love the,

"AP is almost never the right answer" statement.

[Coach Bill]

The girl on the floor was signalling for a timeout, too, but it was the bench that was recognized. I can only guess what was talked about in the huddle, but, the only thing that makes sense is that they decided a held ball was "imminent", if he didn't blow his whistle. Not supported by the rules, but maybe the most fair.

The refs were put in a bad spot, when that one ref ran in saying that wasn't the head coach. If I hear everyone on here correctly, by rule, they shouldn't have gotten charged a timeout, and they should have kept the ball. Not really fair.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

The girl on the floor was signalling for a timeout, too, but it was the bench that was recognized.

That is a pretty important piece of information! In this sitch, I do not think I would have allowed anyone to change my call and would have granted the TO.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

That is a pretty important piece of information! In this sitch, I do not think I would have allowed anyone to change my call and would have granted the TO.

Agree completely. If officials saw this it is unbelievable to me that they didn't grant the TO.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

That is a pretty important piece of information! In this sitch, I do not think I would have allowed anyone to change my call and would have granted the TO.

It was all very quick, but I think the ref saw her jump on the ball, heard the bench, turned to the bench and pointed and blew his whistle. She may have been a fraction of a second later than the bench in calling the timeout. He may not have seen it if he turned quickly. Not sure. I think this ref got over-ruled by a more assertive/experienced partner.

Also - it was a 3-man crew. Don't know if the third ref had any insight during the huddle. He seemed to want no part of it.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

If I hear everyone on here correctly, by rule, they shouldn't have gotten charged a timeout, and they should have kept the ball. Not really fair.

It hasn't been addressed here, but it may depend on when the whistle actually came.

As many (but not all) of us agree, a timeout can be granted prior to the whistle sounding. It happens a lot in these type of situations. A1 dives on the ball, Coach A requests timeout, B1 gains simultaneous possession creating a held ball, official whistles to grant timeout.

Even though the whistle came after the held ball, most of us agree that if we are certain the request came before the held ball we will still grant the timeout.

In this situation, if my whistle is actually an accidental whistle and not for the granting of a timeout, an argument could be made to go with the POI being at the time of the whistle which was a held ball.

The alternative argument would be that you can't have both. Either officials are able to grant a timeout prior to the whistle in which case an accidental whistle must also be applied to the time prior to the held ball, or a timeout isn't actually granted until the whistle blows in which case a timeout shouldn't have been granted anyway.

Thoughts from the peanut gallery?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

It hasn't been addressed here, but it may depend on when the whistle actually came.

As many (but not all) of us agree, a timeout can be granted prior to the whistle sounding. It happens a lot in these type of situations. A1 dives on the ball, Coach A requests timeout, B1 gains simultaneous possession creating a held ball, official whistles to grant timeout.

Even though the whistle came after the held ball, most of us agree that if we are certain the request came before the held ball we will still grant the timeout.

In this situation, if my whistle is actually an accidental whistle and not for the granting of a timeout, an argument could be made to go with the POI being at the time of the whistle which was a held ball.

The alternative argument would be that you can't have both. Either officials are able to grant a timeout prior to the whistle in which case an accidental whistle must also be applied to the time prior to the held ball, or a timeout isn't actually granted until the whistle blows in which case a timeout shouldn't have been granted anyway.

Question from the peanut gallery?

You blew the whistle to grant a TO. That fact doesn't change. Just follow the rules from thereon. Thinking too much can be dangerous. Don't make things any more difficult than they actually are.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You blew the whistle to grant a TO. That fact doesn't change. Just follow the rules from thereon. Thinking too much can be dangerous. Don't make things any more difficult than they actually are.

So you would assess the tech? It is definitely something that we considered.

[ref3808]

This made me think about a sit from last Sunday. HC was a very petite, lovely woman with a very, very soft voice. Late in the game (closely contested) she was trying to request time out, but frankly neither I nor my partner could hear her above the crowd and finally her male assistant got my attention by yelling time out. Since I saw the HC standing next to him and she affirmed the request by nodding her head I granted the time out. Thought everything was fine, but the opposing HC runs over and says "HE can't request time out". Told him what I saw, but even after the game he was still insisting that we erred in granting the time out. Should this be handled differently? Frankly in almost any gym I don't see her being heard when the crowd gets into it. I thought it kind of petty for the opposing HC to complain and then not let it go.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ref3808

This made me think about a sit from last Sunday. HC was a very petite, lovely woman with a very, very soft voice. Late in the game (closely contested) she was trying to request time out, but frankly neither I nor my partner could hear her above the crowd and finally her male assistant got my attention by yelling time out. Since I saw the HC standing next to him and she affirmed the request by nodding her head I granted the time out. Thought everything was fine, but the opposing HC runs over and says "HE can't request time out". Told him what I saw, but even after the game he was still insisting that we erred in granting the time out. Should this be handled differently? Frankly in almost any gym I don't see her being heard when the crowd gets into it. I thought it kind of petty for the opposing HC to complain and then not let it go.

T the opposing HC for leaving his bench area to attempt to influence an official's decision; or (just thought) charge him a TO for a failed attempt at correcting an error (2-10). Yes, it was petty, and if he doesn't let it go, he's getting a T from me.

What was he doing talking to you after the game?

[ref3808]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

T the opposing HC for leaving his bench area to attempt to influence an official's decision; or (just thought) charge him a TO for a failed attempt at correcting an error (2-10). Yes, it was petty, and if he doesn't let it go, he's getting a T from me.

What was he doing talking to you after the game?

In this league local school buildings are used on weekends. Typically the janitor in the school opens the gym and whatever hallway leads to the mens/womens rooms. Officials usually end up leaving a gym bag with their belongings somewhere near the table. Other than emergency doors, it's one way in and one way out. Also we're usually doing multiple games in the same gym so unless it's the last game and you can bolt out of there you are going to have some discussion. Usually I don't mind, it's the 80/20 rule. 80% of the coaches shake your hand, say thank you and set a good example for their teams. The others, well not so much, you learn to make yourself scarce somehow.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by ref3808

This made me think about a sit from last Sunday. HC was a very petite, lovely woman with a very, very soft voice. Late in the game (closely contested) she was trying to request time out, but frankly neither I nor my partner could hear her above the crowd and finally her male assistant got my attention by yelling time out. Since I saw the HC standing next to him and she affirmed the request by nodding her head I granted the time out. Thought everything was fine, but the opposing HC runs over and says "HE can't request time out". Told him what I saw, but even after the game he was still insisting that we erred in granting the time out. Should this be handled differently? Frankly in almost any gym I don't see her being heard when the crowd gets into it. I thought it kind of petty for the opposing HC to complain and then not let it go.

I like to think of it as; We can only grant a timeout requested by a player/HC. I do not think it is against the TO rules for someone else to request a TO, we just can't grant it. Once we confrim that the HC wants a TO, grant it.

The only way I can see penalizing an AC/bench player for requesting a TO, is if I determined it was unsporting and could apply 10-4. Which in most cases would be a stretch for me.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ref3808

This made me think about a sit from last Sunday. HC was a very petite, lovely woman with a very, very soft voice. Late in the game (closely contested) she was trying to request time out, but frankly neither I nor my partner could hear her above the crowd and finally her male assistant got my attention by yelling time out. Since I saw the HC standing next to him and she affirmed the request by nodding her head I granted the time out. Thought everything was fine, but the opposing HC runs over and says "HE can't request time out". Told him what I saw, but even after the game he was still insisting that we erred in granting the time out. Should this be handled differently? Frankly in almost any gym I don't see her being heard when the crowd gets into it. I thought it kind of petty for the opposing HC to complain and then not let it go.

There is more than one way for a HC to request a T-O. You used non-verbals and judgement to determine that the HC had requested a T-O. I see no problem with it as long as you can explain it. And you explained it. Handled appropriately IMO.