Time out

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

See post #14 of this thread,. Your opinion is contrary to what the FED rulesmakers want us to do. Never a good idea IMO.

5.8.3E(b) . . . the official stops play believing the coach requested a time out. Ruling: . . . Team A was not requesting a time-out and therefore should not be granted or charged with one.

This case tells us that we should not grant and charge a time-out if the coach was not requesting one. In the OP the coach tells the official he was not requesting a time-out. In the OP the official still had the ball and the coach was trying to communicate with him. Apparently the official believed he was requesting a time-out. The coach tells the official he was not requesting a time-out. I don't see why it is so hard to apply 5.8.3E(b) to this and move on.

I also am not convinced that applying a case play to this situation is contrary to POE #1. Since I believe the case play applies, I am actually adhering to POE #1.

Of course, I could be wrong.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

5.8.3E(b) . . . the official stops play believing the coach requested a time out. Ruling: . . . Team A was not requesting a time-out and therefore should not be granted or charged with one.

This case tells us that we should not grant and charge a time-out if the coach was not requesting one. In the OP the coach tells the official he was not requesting a time-out. In the OP the official still had the ball and the coach was trying to communicate with him. Apparently the official believed he was requesting a time-out. The coach tells the official he was not requesting a time-out. I don't see why it is so hard to apply 5.8.3E(b) to this and move on.

I also am not convinced that applying a case play to this situation is contrary to POE #1. Since I believe the case play applies, I am actually adhering to POE #1.

Of course, I could be wrong.

There is a very important phrase you are skipping over in 5.8.3E, "side out". The coach did not say "time-out" as was presented in the OP. If a coach signals "T" and says "time-out", he is going to be granted that timeout if all the requirements are met.

-Josh

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

5.8.3E(b) . . . the official stops play believing the coach requested a time out. Ruling: . . . Team A was not requesting a time-out and therefore should not be granted or charged with one.

This case tells us that we should not grant and charge a time-out if the coach was not requesting one.
Of course, I could be wrong.

And you are wrong.

Apples and oranges. In the case play, the coach wasn't calling a TO. In the original post, he was calling one(albeit wrongly).

In the original post, the official said that not only did the coach make a TO request, he also said the coach made the TO signal. It's a real reach imo to try and say that he made a mistake when he did both. If that ain't a TO request, I don't know what is. And if he doesn't know that he can't call timeouts for sometime in the future, well, it's about time he learned

It's a matter of education. Coaches have to learn that they must signal properly(either verbally or by sign) and they we don't take appointments for future timeouts either.

Rules rulz!

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by jdmara

There is a very important phrase you are skipping over in 5.8.3E, "side out". The coach did not say "time-out" as was presented in the OP. If a coach signals "T" and says "time-out", he is going to be granted that timeout if all the requirements are met.

-Josh

I still believe that we should grant and charge a time-out when the coach requests one and we should not grant and charge a time-out when a coach does not request one. As a matter of fact, I am pretty sure that both sides of this discussion agree with that statement and consider it in support of each position.

That leaves us with making a judgement as to whether a coach was requesting a time-out or not. Each situation is a HTBT and I will trust my partners and my judgement when it happens.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

That leaves us with making a judgement as to whether a coach was requesting a time-out or not.

A visual & verbal request for a t/o should be granted in the original sitch. Imagine late in a game & a team is out of t/o but forget & requests one anyway. Can he say I didn't want it to get out of a technical foul?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

1) I still believe that we should grant and charge a time-out when the coach requests one and we should not grant and charge a time-out when a coach does not request one.

2) That leaves us with making a judgement as to whether a coach was requesting a time-out or not. Each situation is a HTBT and I will trust my partners and my judgement when it happens.

1) So do I.

2) If a coach says "time out" and also gives the "T" signal, as per the OP, I don't know how any official could possibly say that coach was NOT requesting a TO. Not much judgment involved in that particular case imo.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by tref

Can he say I didn't want it to get out of a technical foul?

Nope. I would never let a coach change his mind. If he requested a time out, I would grant it and charge it. But if I believed I misunderstood his communication, I would be willing to consider that it may have been my mistake and maybe he should not be granted or charged a TO due to my mistake.

I know I am adding to the OP somewhat but, since the ball is not live and the clock is not running, it is easy for me to believe that I may have misunderstood the coach. In fact he tells me I misunderstood him. Believeing that, I would tell him, similar to what I have done before, If you want a TO when they reach the division line you will need to make a request then."

Actually it happens more as trail when a coach's team is shooting FT's. The coach may say, "If he makes this FT, I want a TO." And maybe coach will even give the T signal as he says TO. We've all heard it. I usually respond with, "OK but you will need to request it after he makes the FT."

Do you throw the TO at him because he said time-out and made the T signal? Probably not.

I may have twisted the OP into my own benign little world a bit. But I do believe it is possible to be a basketball official and be cooperative with players and coaches. It ain't all a battle.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

2) If a coach says "time out" and also gives the "T" signal, as per the OP, I don't know how any official could possibly say that coach was NOT requesting a TO. Not much judgment involved in that particular case imo.

Originally Posted by Dbyb

I grant it to him but he says "no, no I meant I want a time out after my player reaches the half court line not now."

Which reply best describes your interaction with coach after he tells you he wasn't requesting a time-out?

a. Liar, liar pants on fire!
b. If you knew the rules as well as I do, you would know that you did in fact just request a time-out. Now talk to your players while I make sure you are charged a TO.
c.



All in fun.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

We need to use commonsense...maybe look at the coach and ask him do you want a timeout now? We don't need to be a harda$$!

I like where you are going with this. I know that in my games if I am the closest officials I am in the habit of asking the coach "Full or 30" before granting the T/O. Originally, I did it to save the hassle of asking the coach WHILE everyone was heading to the bench, but did find it kept me out of situations where the coach wasn't asking for a T/O but was calling a play that sounded similar.
On a different, yet on topic note, I was talking to an officiating pal of mine and they reminded me of a game where we had a situation similar to the OP. When I asked the coach if they wanted a full or 30 she said she "Actually I want a full time out once we get the ball past half court. Assuming of course my team can GET IT past half court".. They did and she did. Pretty funny

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Judtech

I know that in my games if I am the closest officials I am in the habit of asking the coach "Full or 30" before granting the T/O. Originally, I did it to save the hassle of asking the coach WHILE everyone was heading to the bench, but did find it kept me out of situations where the coach wasn't asking for a T/O but was calling a play that sounded similar.

Pretty funny

It's also pretty funny that you choose to make up your own rules instead of just following the ones we already have. Why do you think the FED put case book play 5.8.3E(b) in? So you could ignore it?
The proper procedure is to ask "full or 30" after granting a TO. If you find yourself in the situation where the coach wasn't asking for a TO, just follow the rules already cited in this thread.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

Which reply best describes your interaction with coach after he tells you he wasn't requesting a time-out?

a. Liar, liar pants on fire!
b. If you knew the rules as well as I do, you would know that you did in fact just request a time-out. Now talk to your players while I make sure you are charged a TO.
c.



All in fun.

Well, if I saw a TO signal as in the original post, he's sureashell gonna be charged with that TO.

If there is doubt/confusion, I'll give a coach the benefit of the doubt/confusion. But if I hear "TO" and also see a TO signal, I ain't gonna say "nevermind" and fail to follow the rules just to avoid a possible argument. That's weak officiating imo.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

This year's NFHS rule book tells you exactly what the FED thinks of officials that ignore rules.

Hanged, drawn and quartered?

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It's also pretty funny that you choose to make up your own rules instead of just following the ones we already have. Why do you think the FED put case book play 5.8.3E(b) in? So you could ignore it?
The proper procedure is to ask "full or 30" after granting a TO. If you find yourself in the situation where the coach wasn't asking for a TO, just follow the rules already cited in this thread.

But does it say you CAN'T ask them before hand? If you already know before hand why should you ask AFTER you grant them the time out? This, along with other interpretations, imo, can fall under the old axiom "There are those who feel that if the Book doesn't say you can than you can't and those who feel that if the Book DOESN'T say you can't then you can." (Its an axiom that is why a double negative is allowed!)

[constable]

This discussion is just about as silly as the blarge thread.

A coach signals and/or asks for a time out, if they are eligible to request it I will grant it at that time.

We should never grant requests in the future " time out on a make" or "time out once we gain the front court"

I had a game tonight where I was with a younger official in a Girls varsity game and my partner granted the latter. I spoke with him and advised him time outs should never be granted in the future.

If coach is asking, grant the request if they can legally request a TO.

[Pantherdreams]

Not to get all metric on anyone, but I'm glad this isn't a problem in FIBA.

Timeouts go to the table, and can only be awarded on deadballs by the table. Keeps things simple for those simple officials like me, and simpler coaches.