Can it be corrected administratively???

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

OK. What does that have to do with it?

Same general philosophy as an AP throw-in. If you give the ball to the wrong team, you can't correct it after the ball is live and the clock has re-started.

Comprendre?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Same general philosophy as an AP throw-in. If you give the ball to the wrong team, you can't correct it after the ball is live and the clock has re-started.

Comprendre?

Si.

But this has nothing to do with that, by rule. Just as it is not a 2-10 correctable error, by rule. I think it is easier to say we have a bookkeeping error than to apply either of these.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I think it is easier to say we have a bookkeeping error than to apply either of these.

It might be easier but is it correct when it's really an official's error rather than a bookkeeping error?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It might be easier but is it correct when it's really an official's error rather than a bookkeeping error?

I'm looking at the result of the official's error. Blue 32 and white 32 are involved in a play. Official signals a foul on white 32. On the way to the table he gets confused and reports it on blue 32. White 32 starts to the free throw line and the official realizes his mistake. Official made a mistake, not the scorer, but the result is still a bookkeeping error. Why is this different? Technical foul was called, correctly so. Offended team got free throws and the ball, correctly so. The only problem is that the foul was attached incorrectly, just as it was in the above example. I see no reason why this cannot be corrected.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Official made a mistake, not the scorer, but the result is still a bookkeeping error. Why is this different?

Not the same. A bookkeeping error is when the book records something different than what is reported. An official's mistake is something the official reported incorrectly, administered incorrectly, or called incorrectly (and is not a correctable error).

Originally Posted by just another ref

Technical foul was called, correctly so. Offended team got free throws and the ball, correctly so. The only problem is that the foul was attached incorrectly, just as it was in the above example. I see no reason why this cannot be corrected.

Regarding the OP....I'd fix this at any time. It is a matter of who the foul was attributed to. You're not uncalling a foul, you're not canceling the FTs/points/etc. You're merely correcting the where the foul is recorded in the book even though the situation was caused by the official indicating that the foul was on B1....and letting the player back in the game since they're not really DQ'd.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not the same. A bookkeeping error is when the book records something different than what is reported. An official's mistake is something the official reported incorrectly, administered incorrectly, or called incorrectly (and is not a correctable error).

Strictly in the context of the official incorrectly reporting who he called a foul on, I disagree with your statement. The rule uses the generic term "bookkeeping mistake" when, had they meant to restrict the scope of the rule to only mistakes made by the scorer, they could have done so by calling it a "scorer's mistake".

And with good reason. In practice, the requirement for the scorer to "record the personal and technical fouls" requires the combined and cooperative efforts of both the scorer and the official. If either one messes up during this process, the result is a mistake in the keeping of the book.

So why would only the scorer's bookkeeping mistakes be correctable?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Strictly in the context of the official incorrectly reporting who he called a foul on, I disagree with your statement. The rule uses the generic term "bookkeeping mistake" when, had they meant to restrict the scope of the rule to only mistakes made by the scorer, they could have done so by calling it a "scorer's mistake".

And with good reason. In practice, the requirement for the scorer to "record the personal and technical fouls" requires the combined and cooperative efforts of both the scorer and the official. If either one messes up during this process, the result is a mistake in the keeping of the book.

So why would only the scorer's bookkeeping mistakes be correctable?

Because they differentiate in the rules between a mistake in record keeping ( a scorer's mistake) and the inadvertant setting aside of a rule(an official's mistake). See the language used in the RULING of case book play 2.11.10SitB.

If you have jumpers facing the wrong way and you put the ball into play, you can't have a do-over as per case book play 5.2.1. That's because the officials inadvertantly set aside a rule(aka screwed up). If you also screw up an AP and give the ball to the wrong team, you again can't go back and have a do-over after that AP throw-in ended as per case book play 6.4.1SitD. These are both examples of an official inadvertantly setting aside a rule. And in both cases the scorer did not make an error of any kind. And in the OP, the official wrongfully charged a technical foul for the DOG to the player instead of that player's team. That official also inadvertantly set aside a rule and the scorer did not make a mistake. The scorer entered onto the scoresheet exactly what the official told him to enter.

That's the difference between an official's mistake and a scorer's mistake by rule.