Time out

[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.

[bainsey]

Maybe this is putting the cart before the horse, but here's a thought...

The only time we honor a time-out request from the team who would not be in-bounding the ball after that time out, is when the ball is dead.

On a potential held ball situation (A1 and B2 gripping the ball simultaneously), the ball is not dead. If you honor the time-out request on a live ball, you're saying that team has player control (one exception notwithstanding). So, if you honor a time-out request from either side during a tie-up, you're saying that both players have player control, and the team that calls time out first would get the in-bounds after the time-out.

For this reason, I agree with BBR. I don't believe you can give Team B an opportunity to call time-out until they earn control, solely. (Is there such a thing as dual control?) I don't think you can honor team A's request during a tie-up, either. My knee-jerk reaction is to ignore any requests, and call the held ball.

(The aforementioned exception is when you mistakenly whistle a time-out when that team didn't have player control. In that case, you have to grant it, anyway.)

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

IMO...Snaq's put it in a nutshell.

I just can't see rules support for granting a TO when two players BOTH have possesion of the ball...(as Camron stated)

IOW...are we "rewarding" the team in control for requesting a TO before we put air in the whistle for a held ball? (BBR's view?)

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

I honestly don't know how you can think that when the rule clearly says "have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness." Seems to me it's obviously talking about control of the ball.

But if you think so, then please cite the rule that says so. I've looked at 4-12 until I'm blue in the face and I can't find a thing that supports that.

Originally Posted by RookieDude

IMO...Snaq's put it in a nutshell.

I just can't see rules support for granting a TO when two players BOTH have possesion of the ball...(as Camron stated)

If both players are holding the ball, then we have a held ball and we need to blow the whistle.

IOW...are we "rewarding" the team in control for requesting a TO before we put air in the whistle for a held ball? (BBR's view?)

We're not rewarding anything. We're awarding a timeout to the team that has possession of the ball. Coaches call timeouts to avoid a held ball, clodely guarded sitch, BC violation, etc. all the time. This is no different.

Play:

A1 has the ball and B1 attempts to grab it. Obviously, there's going to be a held ball. The trail blows the whistle as Coach A has requested a timeout. A second later, the lead blows his whistle for a held ball.

Are you guys honestly going to tell me that you're going to ignore the first whistle and go with the second whistle?

I have a difficult time believing anyone would answer yes to that question.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I honestly don't know how you can think that when the rule clearly says "have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness." Seems to me it's obviously talking about control of the ball.

But if you think so, then please cite the rule that says so. I've looked at 4-12 until I'm blue in the face and I can't find a thing that supports that.



If both players are holding the ball, then we have a held ball and we need to blow the whistle.

{quote]IOW...are we "rewarding" the team in control for requesting a TO before we put air in the whistle for a held ball? (BBR's view?)

No, we're awarding a timeout to the team that has possession of the ball.

Play:

A1 has the ball and B1 attempts to grab it. Obviously, there's going to be a held ball. The trail blows the whistle as Coach A has requested a timeout. A second later, the lead blows his whistle for a held ball.

Are you guys honestly going to tell me that you're going to ignore the first whistle and go with the second whistle?

I have a difficult time believing anyone would answer yes to that question.[/QUOTE]

+1

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I honestly don't know how you can think that when the rule clearly says "have their hands so firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness." Seems to me it's obviously talking about control of the ball.

But if you think so, then please cite the rule that says so. I've looked at 4-12 until I'm blue in the face and I can't find a thing that supports that.

We only have two types of control. What kind of control do you think it is referring to?

Since it is talking about two individual players, it must be player control that it is talking about....as opposed to team control. A player has control of the ball has player control and vice versa.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

We only have two types of control. What kind of control do you think it is referring to?

Since it is talking about two individual players, it must be player control that it is talking about....as opposed to team control. A player has control of the ball has player control and vice versa.

The word control is used throughout the rule book. it does not always refer to player or team control. In this situation, it refers to control of the ball.

Again, cite a rule reference that supports your position.

Also, I noticed you didn't respond to the play I posted. What would you do?

PLAY
A1 has the ball and B1 attempts to grab it. Obviously, there's going to be a held ball. The trail blows the whistle as Coach A has requested a timeout. A second later, the lead blows his whistle for a held ball.
Are you honestly going to tell me that you're going to ignore the first whistle and go with the second whistle?

[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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by 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.

Do you even know what a dead ball is?
Your thinking is not correct.

[TheBest]

I hit the enter key after using the words "dead ball". Thanks for correcting me
So if no PC or TC the ball is in play and belongs to no one. Thus NO TO can be called. What is wrong with that?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TheBest

I hit the enter key after using the words "dead ball". Thanks for correcting me
So if no PC or TC the ball is in play and belongs to no one. Thus NO TO can be called. What is wrong with that?

There is team control still, as nothing has happened to end it. The only time you'll have a live ball on the court with no team control is during and following either a try or a throw in.

If a coach requests a TO during the time I'm trying to decide if I should call a held ball, it's still a held ball.