The Official Forum
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Messy situation (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/60279-messy-situation.html)

youngump Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwest (Post 710857)
All I am asking is for you to show me the rule that says you can't wipe out the T. You haven't yet! This is not covered by rule 2.10. There are other things we correct that is not listed under 2-10. You call a foul on number 13. You report it. We line up to shoot two free throws. The two free throws have been shot and the ball is out of bounds. The table buzzes you over. There is no 13 on the floor. There is a 31. You realized you called it on the wrong player. This is not a correctable error. So you can't change it by your reading of 2.10. No where in the rule book does it say we can now change the foul to number 31, but we do because it is the right thing to do.
<yellow-ball-ump-lurker-interruption>You can't uncall the foul on 13. If there is no 13 in the book, one will have to be added. Charge the technical foul and move on.</yellow-ball-ump-lurker-interruption>

[If the previous tags weren't enough, and anyone has any remote chance of taking me seriously, don't.]
________
Medical Marijuana

just another ref Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 710890)
Not going to read all 6.5 pages of this thread, so maybe this was already brought up...wouldn't the incorrect information given by the official scorekeeper be considered a bookkeeping error? And are we not allowed to correct those at any time?

If the table gives us bad information, we need to rectify that - otherwise we will have table crews start doing that sort of thing all the time.
We have a winner.

just another ref Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 710905)
There has to be a limit on how far back you can go to rescind a T. Otherwise, are you suggesting you can go back and correct it two minutes later if that's when the table tells you they messed up?
Why does there have to be a limit? There is no limit on correcting a bookkeeping error. Consider this a ripple of that bookkeeping error.

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 710910)
We have a winner.
So what's your time limit? A calls a timeout with no 3 seconds left, table tells you they had none left, so you call the T and shoot the shots. B's shots tie the score and you go into overtime. Two minutes into overtime, the table realizes the error and tells you that A did in fact have a timeout left at the time. You going to wipe the points at this point?

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:35pm
A bookkeeping error does not include the FTs that were shot. A bookkeeping error led to the T, sure, but the FTs themselves are not a bookkeeping error.

bob jenkins Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwest (Post 710864)
We are having a friendly debate and then you resort to this! WOW!
I think you're not having a friendly debate as much as an argument (in the Monty Python-esque sense of the word).

rwest Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:43pm
it was friendly regardless from my perspective
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 710921)
I think you're not having a friendly debate as much as an argument (in the Monty Python-esque sense of the word).
Whatever you want to call it, it was friendly from my end.

Rich Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 710921)
I think you're not having a friendly debate as much as an argument (in the Monty Python-esque sense of the word).
Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!!

My *favorite* Python sketch.

My feeling on the thread is that there are times when you have to officiate and inject a little common sense on the court. Others think that's the slippery slope to anarchy. Do what works for you, the world isn't going to end either way.

just another ref Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN (Post 710926)
Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!!
No, that would be abuse. Plenty of that in this business, as well.


Shut your festering gob, you tit! Somebody try that instead of the stop sign.

bob jenkins Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN (Post 710926)
My feeling on the thread is that there are times when you have to officiate and inject a little common sense on the court. Others think that's the slippery slope to anarchy. Do what works for you, the world isn't going to end either way.
Well, that's my feeling on the OP, but my feeling is that the thread could be summed up as "You can't use rule 2-3; I'M using rule 2-3."

TimTaylor Thu Dec 30, 2010 01:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 710914)
A bookkeeping error does not include the FTs that were shot. A bookkeeping error led to the T, sure, but the FTs themselves are not a bookkeeping error.
No argument with this, but it begets the question "Were the FTs merited?" If the T was assessed due to a bookkeeping error, logic says that both the T and resulting FTs are unmerited.

It seems to me that since the T was a result of the bookkeeping error, it can be corrected(rescinded) any time until the R approves the final score per 2-11-11. The resulting FT's, on the other hand, would fall into the "unmerited" category and must be corrected within the time constraints specified under 2-10.

Just playing devil's advocate.......

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 01:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor (Post 710932)
No argument with this, but it begets the question "Were the FTs merited?" If the T was assessed due to a bookkeeping error, logic says that both the T and resulting FTs are unmerited.

It seems to me that since the T was a result of the bookkeeping error, it can be corrected(rescinded) any time until the R approves the final score per 2-11-11. The resulting FT's, on the other hand, would fall into the "unmerited" category and must be corrected within the time constraints specified under 2-10.

Just playing devil's advocate.......
Interesting, but the T itself is not a bookkeeping error.

Jurassic Referee Thu Dec 30, 2010 01:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN (Post 710926)
My feeling on the thread is that there are times when you have to officiate and inject a little common sense on the court. Others think that's the slippery slope to anarchy.
I think that's why what we do is more of an art than a science sometime.

My recommendation in these gray areas is to pick what you think is the right thing to do, do it quickly, and then tell whoever you report to about it and let him damnwell worry about it.

TimTaylor Thu Dec 30, 2010 01:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 710941)
Interesting, but the T itself is not a bookkeeping error.
No, but it is both administrative and the direct result of the bookkeeping error. This is where I believe common sense, rule 2-3 and doing what is right come into play.

It's a good discussion - Might ask our SRI when I see him next......

Just had another crazy thought (and no, I haven't been anywhere near BillyMac's egg nog) - how about a rule change that lets us charge the home book with an administrative T in a situation like this where their error causes a penalty/disadvantage to the opponents....sort of a way to even things up.....;)

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 01:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor (Post 710951)
No, but it is both administrative and the direct result of the bookkeeping error. This is where I believe common sense, rule 2-3 and doing what is right come into play.

It's a good discussion - Might ask our SRI when I see him next......

Just had another crazy thought (and no, I haven't been anywhere near BillyMac's egg nog) - how about a rule change that lets us charge the home book with an administrative T in a situation like this where their error causes a penalty/disadvantage to the opponents....sort of a way to even things up.....;)
That might work well in most regular season games, but not when the home school isn't providing the official scorer.

BillyMac Thu Dec 30, 2010 02:50pm
It's My Basketball ...
 
In my games, if a technical foul is charged in error, due to a bookkeeping error, then I'm treating the foul shots resulting from that error like any other correctable error time limit, that is, maybe they'll count, and maybe they won't, depending on the statute of limitations for "real" correctable errors. I'll take back the charged foul itself, at any time, after I'm convinced that it was an actual bookkeeping error. Do I have citations for this? No. Just common sense.

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 02:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 710966)
In my games, if a technical foul is charged in error, due to a bookkeeping error, then I'm treating the foul shots resulting from that error like any other correctable error time limit, that is, maybe they'll count, and maybe they won't, depending on the statute of limitations for "real" correctable errors. I'll take back the charged foul itself, at any time, after I'm convinced that it was an actual bookkeeping error. Do I have citations for this? No. Just common sense.
This is what Tim suggested, and the more I think about it, the more it makes sense to me.

Question, though. In the case of an excessive timeout, where the coach has already paid the penalty for the timeout but the book later tells you they were wrong. I see no reason to rescind the T here, as all it does take away a timeout that the coach has already "purchased" with the T penalty.

BillyMac Thu Dec 30, 2010 03:17pm
No Shots, One And One, Double Bonus ???
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 710967)
I see no reason to rescind the T here.
Team fouls toward the bonus ???

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 03:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 710972)
Team fouls toward the bonus ???
Maybe, but the coach has already purchased the 6th TO even though he used it out of order. Take away the T, and now you've taken away the extra TO. All for one less foul towards the bonus?

youngump Thu Dec 30, 2010 03:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 710974)
Maybe, but the coach has already purchased the 6th TO even though he used it out of order. Take away the T, and now you've taken away the extra TO. All for one less foul towards the bonus?
If you insist he can't have both (the timeout and the t effects gone), then why not give him the choice. (Though I think you can say that he paid for the timeout with the free throws and lose the rest. Sure it was a cheap timeout but since he didn't get to choose whether to pay ...)
________
NEXIUM CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

Camron Rust Thu Dec 30, 2010 04:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor (Post 710932)
No argument with this, but it begets the question "Were the FTs merited?" If the T was assessed due to a bookkeeping error, logic says that both the T and resulting FTs are unmerited.

It seems to me that since the T was a result of the bookkeeping error, it can be corrected(rescinded) any time until the R approves the final score per 2-11-11. The resulting FT's, on the other hand, would fall into the "unmerited" category and must be corrected within the time constraints specified under 2-10.

Just playing devil's advocate.......
No...many of the correctable errors are often a result of bookkeeping errors. You can always fix the error in the book, but you can't fix the FTs after a time limit.

You can correct the actual bookkeeping error at any time, but you can't correct the ramifications (FT's, T's, etc.) of a bookkeeping error after time limits have expired.

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 05:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump (Post 710975)
If you insist he can't have both (the timeout and the t effects gone), then why not give him the choice. (Though I think you can say that he paid for the timeout with the free throws and lose the rest. Sure it was a cheap timeout but since he didn't get to choose whether to pay ...)
What I'm saying is you can't go back after the 2-10 time frame and take away the free throws, no matter how you slice it.

What if that foul was the team's 6th, and then they only committed one more foul that half, resulting in two made free throws. Do you go back and wipe those FTs off, too?

TimTaylor Thu Dec 30, 2010 05:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 710985)
No...many of the correctable errors are often a result of bookkeeping errors. You can always fix the error in the book, but you can't fix the FTs after a time limit.
I thought that's what I said........

Quote:
You can correct the actual bookkeeping error at any time, but you can't correct the ramifications (FT's, T's, etc.) of a bookkeeping error after time limits have expired.
Here is where I disagree. The only ramification you can't correct after a certain time limit by specific rule are the FTs. If the only penalty of the T was the FTs, I wouldn't have a problem with it. The problem is the unwarranted T also counts as a team foul towards the bonus, and therefore continues to unfairly and unjustly penalize that team for the rest of that half through no fault of their own. No matter how you try to cut it, this is not in the spirit of fair play. Common sense says rescind the unwarranted administrative T and remove the foul from the team foul count. The rule book doesn't cover every eventuality - sometimes you just need to step up and do the right thing.

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 05:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor (Post 710995)
I thought that's what I said........



Here is where I disagree. The only ramification you can't correct after a certain time limit by specific rule are the FTs. If the only penalty of the T was the FTs, I wouldn't have a problem with it. The problem is the unwarranted T also counts as a team foul towards the bonus, and therefore continues to unfairly and unjustly penalize that team for the rest of that half through no fault of their own. No matter how you try to cut it, this is not in the spirit of fair play. Common sense says rescind the unwarranted administrative T and remove the foul from the team foul count. The rule book doesn't cover every eventuality - sometimes you just need to step up and do the right thing.
What about excess timeouts? remove the T and still let him keep the extra timeout? The bulk of the punishment can't be rescinded even by your reasoning.

TimTaylor Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 710997)
What about excess timeouts? remove the T and still let him keep the extra timeout? The bulk of the punishment can't be rescinded even by your reasoning.
Confused me for a second...OP was about a roster issue....had to go back a couple pages & look.

Addressing this from the point of a T issued for an excessive TO that turned out not to be. Even if they request a timeout in excess of the allotted number, we still grant it and they get to use it - it just costs them a T per 5-12-2. Since the TO that started the whole mess actually was their last allotted time out and they got to use it, simply rescinding the T should take care of it.

just another ref Thu Dec 30, 2010 07:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 710993)
What I'm saying is you can't go back after the 2-10 time frame and take away the free throws, no matter how you slice it.
I think we all agreed with that, didn't we? In the OP, it was within the time limit. Mistake was discovered, T was erased, free throws are now unmerited. Take them off the board and resume at POI. This work for you?

rockyroad Thu Dec 30, 2010 08:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 711008)
I think we all agreed with that, didn't we? In the OP, it was within the time limit. Mistake was discovered, T was erased, free throws are now unmerited. Take them off the board and resume at POI. This work for you?
Works for me...they were unmerited free throws due to a bookkeeping error. The time frame requirements are met - take the points off the board, erase the T, and play on.

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 09:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor (Post 711003)
Confused me for a second...OP was about a roster issue....had to go back a couple pages & look.

Addressing this from the point of a T issued for an excessive TO that turned out not to be. Even if they request a timeout in excess of the allotted number, we still grant it and they get to use it - it just costs them a T per 5-12-2. Since the TO that started the whole mess actually was their last allotted time out and they got to use it, simply rescinding the T should take care of it.

Except that the TO at the time cost them two free throws and (possibly) possession that we can't rescind. The coach bought an extra TO with the T, now you're taking that away and giving him what back? A team foul?

Adam Thu Dec 30, 2010 09:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 711008)
I think we all agreed with that, didn't we? In the OP, it was within the time limit. Mistake was discovered, T was erased, free throws are now unmerited. Take them off the board and resume at POI. This work for you?
At this point I'm not sure what we've all agreed on. The argument seemed to be that since it's a "bookkeeping error," it can be corrected (the whole thing) at any time. I'd like to see an interp on this particular issue to be honest.

Judtech Thu Dec 30, 2010 09:48pm
I'll stir the pudding. The argument could also be that we JUDGED it to be a bookkeeping error. After we render our judgement, unless covered by the CE section, that judgement is final. Same as any other foul or violation. Again, just b/c we recieve other information doesnt affect anything. If I am doing a game and I call a foul but see on the video screen it was clearly NOT a foul, am I going to take it back?
Still, if we take time to sort through it at the table before issuing any T, it would go along way to eliminating this problem.

Camron Rust Thu Dec 30, 2010 10:05pm
After the T, the other team got possession, are we going to cancel the points they scored on that possession or cancel the PC foul committed by their team on that possession...all under the premise that it was a bookkeeping error and everything that followed from it was erroneous?

TimTaylor Thu Dec 30, 2010 10:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by judtech (Post 711044)
still, if we take time to sort through it at the table before issuing any t, it would go along way to eliminating this problem.
+1

Judtech Thu Dec 30, 2010 10:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 711049)
After the T, the other team got possession, are we going to cancel the points they scored on that possession or cancel the PC foul committed by their team on that possession...all under the premise that it was a bookkeeping error and everything that followed from it was erroneous?
You mean a "Do Over"?:eek:

TimTaylor Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judtech (Post 711044)
Still, if we take time to sort through it at the table before issuing any T, it would go along way to eliminating this problem.
And I'll add that I'm going to take a hard look at the home book. If it's sloppy and having problems, while the visiting book is, by contrast, right on top of things, I might go as far as to rule the visiting book as the official book from that point on per 2-11-11. (And before we all start belaboring the point, there's nothing in the rule as to when the referee can do this - they could do it at any time during the game they felt it necessary.) Might be a great way to send a message.

Thoughts?

rockyroad Fri Dec 31, 2010 02:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 711049)
After the T, the other team got possession, are we going to cancel the points they scored on that possession or cancel the PC foul committed by their team on that possession...all under the premise that it was a bookkeeping error and everything that followed from it was erroneous?
WTF are you talking about? The Op'er was very clear that the Visiting Coach brought the roster issue to their attention as soon as the second free throw was shot...so you're just making crap up now? For what purpose?

In the OP, it was a bookkeeping error that led to unmerited free throws - the time frame is intact. Fix it.

Camron Rust Fri Dec 31, 2010 04:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 711106)
WTF are you talking about? The Op'er was very clear that the Visiting Coach brought the roster issue to their attention as soon as the second free throw was shot...so you're just making crap up now? For what purpose?

In the OP, it was a bookkeeping error that led to unmerited free throws - the time frame is intact. Fix it.
There were people, not the OP, referenced by Snaqwells claiming they'd cancel the T and maybe other consequences at any time, even minutes/quarters later. THAT is what I was talking about.

I agree that it can be fixed up to a point...and that exact point is clearly debateable. I believe it to be when the first FT is taken. I could accept that it could be later...as late as the normal correctable error limits....no later. After that, there is no going back and changing anything except for perhaps the number of timeouts remaining.

deecee Fri Dec 31, 2010 05:21am
assuming no other action has taken place and its just been free throws I would wipe the fts off as well.

mj Fri Dec 31, 2010 10:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee (Post 711113)
assuming no other action has taken place and its just been free throws I would wipe the fts off as well.
I would handle it the same way.

Indianaref Fri Dec 31, 2010 10:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 711049)
After the T, the other team got possession, are we going to cancel the points they scored on that possession or cancel the PC foul committed by their team on that possession...all under the premise that it was a bookkeeping error and everything that followed from it was erroneous?
Can an "do over" argument be made that 10.1.8 Comment is a specific case play where a field goal and common fouls are cancelled.

Camron Rust Fri Dec 31, 2010 02:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indianaref (Post 711153)
Can an "do over" argument be made that 10.1.8 Comment is a specific case play where a field goal and common fouls are cancelled.
No, in that case team A, having just scored, threw in a dead ball and scored a dead ball. The ball would have only become live had team B taken it OOB for the throwin.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:12am.
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1