Time out

[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?

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

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?

I'll answer it...

Trail gets the call...s/he was first, so s/he obviously heard the TO request BEFORE the held ball.

Again, If I see a held ball situation and I haven't quite put air in the whistle for it...

...and then, the HC requests a TO...he ain't getting the TO just because I havent' put air in my whistle. In my mind it was a held ball PRIOR to the TO request.

If you saw the held ball but, hadn't blown the whistle for the held ball...and at approx. the same time the HC requests a TO...are you saying you would grant the TO just because you have not blown the whistle for a held ball?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

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.

The word player is implied in the reference to "two opponents".

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

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?

You play is ambiguous. No one can know that the call should be with the information given. It appears that you may be saying the ball is not yet held, so a timeout would be correct. But, I can't tell what the sequence of events is from what you posted.

It seems that basic common sense is all you need to know that a player doesn't have player control of a ball held by another player.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

If you saw the held ball but, hadn't blown the whistle for the held ball...and at approx. the same time the HC requests a TO...are you saying you would grant the TO just because you have not blown the whistle for a held ball?

No, I'll blow whichever came first.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The word player is implied in the reference to "two opponents".

Implied. LOL!

You play is ambiguous. No one can know that the call should be with the information given. It appears that you may be saying the ball is not yet held, so a timeout would be correct. But, I can't tell what the sequence of events is from what you posted.

Not sure why, Snaq and Rookiedude didn't have any trouble with the sequence. A whistle for a TO and a second later, a whistle for a held ball. Very clear.

It seems that basic common sense is all you need to know that a player doesn't have player control of a ball held by another player.

Even if it's contrary to the rules, right?

Have fun, I'm done, we just won't agree on this one. But officials everywhere will continue to grant the timeout if that whistle comes first.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Have fun, I'm done, we just won't agree on this one. But officials everywhere will continue to grant the timeout if that request comes first.

If you replace "whistle" above with "request", does that simplify it so everybody should agree? If a legal TO request is made before the held ball is called, there is NO justification under the rules NOT to grant that TO request,

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Again, how are you going to rule on this play.

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?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You play is ambiguous. No one can know that the call should be with the information given. It appears that you may be saying the ball is not yet held, so a timeout would be correct. But, I can't tell what the sequence of events is from what you posted.

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Not sure why, Snaq and Rookiedude didn't have any trouble with the sequence. A whistle for a TO and a second later, a whistle for a held ball. Very clear.

Your play only says that their is GOING to be a held ball when the first whistle for a TO is blown. It sounds like that someone is anticipating the play, not describing what has occurred. Seeing that a held ball is about to occur is irrelevant. We you saying that there actually was a held ball and the official just blew the whistle really late, after the timeout whistle, or was there not really a held ball yet until after the timeout whistle. The instant that matters is the one where the defender grabs the ball, not where you anticipate a held ball.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It seems that basic common sense is all you need to know that a player doesn't have player control of a ball held by another player.

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Even if it's contrary to the rules, right?

You mean the rule that says if a player is holding the ball, they have player control? Doesn't that apply to any player on the court? Even a defender? How can you call time out if a player of the other team has player control?