Time out

[GoodwillRef]

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.

I am not saying don't follow the rules, I am just saying no the situation and use some game management skills. Since the ball is still in the leads hands you may have an extra second to confirm that he/she wants a timeout, especially at the end of the game.

[APG]

Originally Posted by 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.

In reality, I don't see granting coaches the ability to request timeouts as big of a deal as we sometimes make it out to be. Not enough so that requests have to go through the table and only during dead ball . Are there times when the closest official can not see or hear a coach requesting a timeout? Sure, but there is almost always an official either close enough grant the request or one who should be opposite table side that should be able to pick up a coach requesting one. This and appropriate game awareness usually makes this a non-issue.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

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.

Essentially, the OP was not the official's fault for misunderstanding the coach, but the coach's fault for asking for a TO when they weren't entitiled to one (for some point in the future). Another part of 5.8.3(E) specifically states that if an official mistakenly grants a TO to a team that requests one, but isn't entitiled to ask for one, the TO is still granted. Think of it in terms of both the coach and official screwing up, but the TO is still granted anyway. We can't say, "Whoops, we screwed up - nevermind, play on." In the part of case you're citing, it's 100% the official's fault, as they heard something that was not said at all.

In the OP, the coach did verbalize and signal a TO. Even though they were trying to add qualifiers (at some point in the future), it's not 100% the official's fault for not understanding those qualifications.

In the case of a coach asking me for a TO at some point in the future - "Give me a TO if he makes this second FT" - I don't consider that the request, but rather a heads-up that the coach will be making a valid request at a particular time in the near future, and I will now be aware of it to grant the request at that time. Many times I'll reply, "Thanks for letting me know; give me a nod again after the FT". The nod is now the request that is granted at the proper time.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

I am not saying don't follow the rules, I am just saying no the situation and use some game management skills. Since the ball is still in the leads hands you may have an extra second to confirm that he/she wants a timeout, especially at the end of the game.

Nope, you sureasheck ARE saying don't follow the rules. The appropriate rules have already been cited. If a coach requests a timeout, we're supposed to grant it by rule if the ball is in the lead's hands. Period. That's got nuthin' to do with game management either. If a coach screws up a TO request, it's not up to us to ignore plainly-written rules to save his azz. And don't forget that while you are saving that coach's azz, you're also screwing the other coach and his team by allowing an advantage that was never meant under the rules.

Sorry, but I just can't agree with you on this one.

But if it'll make you feel any better, Chris Webber and the rest of the 1993 Michigan U basketball team do agree with you.

[SWMOzebra]

Originally Posted by jurassic referee

and don't forget that while you are saving that coach's azz, you're also screwing the other coach and his team by allowing an advantage that was never meant under the rules.

+1

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, you sureasheck ARE saying don't follow the rules. The appropriate rules have already been cited. If a coach requests a timeout, we're supposed to grant it by rule if the ball is in the lead's hands. Period. That's got nuthin' to do with game management either. If a coach screws up a TO request, it's not up to us to ignore plainly-written rules to save his azz. And don't forget that while you are saving that coach's azz, you're also screwing the other coach and his team by allowing an advantage that was never meant under the rules.

Sorry, but I just can't agree with you on this one.

But if it'll make you feel any better, Chris Webber and the rest of the 1993 Michigan U basketball team do agree with you.

But wasn't the ball already inbounds and live in 93 whereas the OP the ball has not yet been placed at the disposal of the player? Apples and Oranges maybe? Or pears and prunes?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Judtech

But wasn't the ball already inbounds and live in 93 whereas the OP the ball has not yet been placed at the disposal of the player? Apples and Oranges maybe? Or pears and prunes?

Um, no. In both instances, a TO may be legally requested and must then be granted by rule. There's no appreciable difference at all, rules-wise, between the two situations except that you wouldn't grant a defensive request for a TO in the Michigan game.