Time out

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Are you sure about that? Isn't the underlying point of a held ball that team A and team B both have control? The player from team B IS holding the ball....which fits the requirements for establishing team control...yet team A hasn't lost control since they're still holding it. If that were not the case, we'd never have a held ball.

Yes, but until a held ball is whistled team A is the ONLY team with team control.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

Yes, but until a held ball is whistled team A is the ONLY team with team control.

What makes team control...having a player holding the ball. Is player B holding the ball? If so, they've met the definition for team control.

A held ball is called, in a sense, because both teams have control.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

What makes team control...having a player holding the ball. Is player B holding the ball? If so, they've met the definition for team control.

A held ball is called, in a sense, because both teams have control.

Yes but when both ARE holding the ball...

----

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scratch85 View Post
4-25-1 A held ball occurs when opponents have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness

No control, no TO.
The rule is addressing control of the ball, not team or player control.

Team A has player/team control and can request a timeout prior to a held ball being declared.

----

So team a has team and player control BUT B does not.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

Yes but when both ARE holding the ball...

----

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scratch85 View Post
4-25-1 A held ball occurs when opponents have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness

No control, no TO.
The rule is addressing control of the ball, not team or player control.

Team A has player/team control and can request a timeout prior to a held ball being declared.

----

So team a has team and player control BUT B does not.

Once both teams get there hands on the ball, it can only be either dual player/team control or no player control for either (although team control may persist). A timeout is either no longer an option for either team or a timeout is an option for both.

(Now that I've thought about this a bit more, I'm going to flip on my reasoning but the result is the same.)

I believe neither player has control. Perhaps team control doesn't end (this doesn't really matter), but player control does end.

The rule you cited doesn't refer to which team/player is which in referring to not being able to obtain control but refers to them as opponents. It is saying that NEITHER player has control when both are holding the ball. It establishes the concept that player control exists only when a player is holding the ball alone. If you think about it, the whole point of player control is that the player is in control of the ball and is free to do what they wish with the ball (dribble, shoot, pass). And that is something they can not do if someone else is also holding it.

Once B gets their hands on the ball, player A (not necessarily team A) has lost player control and the option of a timeout is gone.

The only things that can happen next is that someone gains player control by pulling the ball free or a held ball is called.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Once both teams get there hands on the ball, it can only be either dual player/team control or no player control for either (although team control may persist). A timeout is either no longer an option for either team or a timeout is an option for both.

(Now that I've thought about this a bit more, I'm going to flip on my reasoning but the result is the same.)

I believe neither player has control. Perhaps team control doesn't end (this doesn't really matter), but player control does end.

The rule you cited doesn't refer to which team/player is which in referring to not being able to obtain control but refers to them as opponents. It is saying that NEITHER player has control when both are holding the ball. It establishes the concept that player control exists only when a player is holding the ball alone. If you think about it, the whole point of player control is that the player is in control of the ball and is free to do what they wish with the ball (dribble, shoot, pass). And that is something they can not do if someone else is also holding it.

Once B gets their hands on the ball, player A (not necessarily team A) has lost player control and the option of a timeout is gone.

The only things that can happen next is that someone gains player control by pulling the ball free or a held ball is called.

And then a time out request may be granted to either team. Though it probably will not be wanted in most cases.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Once both teams get there hands on the ball, it can only be either dual player/team control or no player control for either (although team control may persist). A timeout is either no longer an option for either team or a timeout is an option for both.

(Now that I've thought about this a bit more, I'm going to flip on my reasoning but the result is the same.)

I believe neither player has control. Perhaps team control doesn't end (this doesn't really matter), but player control does end.

The rule you cited doesn't refer to which team/player is which in referring to not being able to obtain control but refers to them as opponents. It is saying that NEITHER player has control when both are holding the ball. It establishes the concept that player control exists only when a player is holding the ball alone. If you think about it, the whole point of player control is that the player is in control of the ball and is free to do what they wish with the ball (dribble, shoot, pass). And that is something they can not do if someone else is also holding it.

Once B gets their hands on the ball, player A (not necessarily team A) has lost player control and the option of a timeout is gone.

The only things that can happen next is that someone gains player control by pulling the ball free or a held ball is called.

The rules do not support dual team or player control. Also, the rule referred to above does not address player control. The rule refers to physically controlling the ball, not team or player control.

Maybe it's semantics, if both players are holding the ball AND the official hits the whistle, THEN it becomes a held ball. Until the held ball is whistled, Team A still has player and team control.

As a matter of practice, I always see the timeout granted if it's whistled before the held ball is whistled.

[RobbyinTN]

OK, another question related to this.

Suppose the given scenario does indeed occur and you have a double whistle. The L is calling a jump ball and the T is calling for a time out by Team B. Do you then grant the TO and put the ball in play by AP rules (would be my thought) or.......?

Robby

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by RobbyinTN

OK, another question related to this.

Suppose the given scenario does indeed occur and you have a double whistle. The L is calling a jump ball and the T is calling for a time out by Team B. Do you then grant the TO and put the ball in play by AP rules (would be my thought) or.......?

Since I'm pretty admant that Team B can't call timout in this situation, I think you know my answer.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by RobbyinTN

OK, another question related to this.

Suppose the given scenario does indeed occur and you have a double whistle. The L is calling a jump ball and the T is calling for a time out by Team B. Do you then grant the TO and put the ball in play by AP rules (would be my thought) or.......?

Robby

get together, figure out which happened first. If the TO happened first, offense keeps it. If the held ball (not the whistle, but the held ball) happened before the TO (request, not whistle), then go AP. You can assume the requesting coach doesn't want the TO, but I ask him anyway.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Also, the rule referred to above does not address player control. The rule refers to physically controlling the ball, not team or player control.

This is where I disagree. I think the rule IS talking about player control....that it is lost when another player also has their hands on the ball.

[TheBest]

So since there is only 1 ball only 1 team can have PC/TC.
So when B1 grabs the ball can one correctly argue that the ball is no longer in play and as such is really a dead ball ie free for any team to get control off? (and if they can't a jump ball etc etc)

If this thinking is correct (idea based on discussion above) no coach should be able to ask for a TO.