Time out

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A foul causes the ball to be dead, a timeout request does not. When was the request granted? ...

In this case it made the ball dead b/c it was disconcertion.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In this case it made the ball dead b/c it was disconcertion.

Nope, not immediately. Disconcertion is a delayed violation.

I was thinking I'd seen a case play or interp that indicated disconcertion by the bench was a technical foul; but I can't find it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Nope, not immediately. Disconcertion is a delayed violation.
.

I'll amend. If the disconcertion causes the free-thrower to violate the ball becomes dead, the violation is ignored, and the free-thrower gets their shot.

And in this particular case I'm ignoring the time-out request b/c it was not a legal request and I did not recognize it.

[just another ref]

I have a hard time calling this disconcertion.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I have a hard time calling this disconcertion.

Why? You either have to do that or call the violation. Or, I guess, consider the TO request to have been granted.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Why? You either have to do that or call the violation. Or, I guess, consider the TO request to have been granted.

It is ultimately the responsibility of the player to know what makes the ball dead.

Team A is holding the ball, sitting on a small lead late in the game. Coach B yells "Time out!" A1 tosses you the ball. You gonna somehow give it back to him here?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is ultimately the responsibility of the player to know what makes the ball dead.

Team A is holding the ball, sitting on a small lead late in the game. Coach B yells "Time out!" A1 tosses you the ball. You gonna somehow give it back to him here?

Yep. Every time. Knowing the coach has no timeouts left would only make me more likely to give it to him here. The case play seems pretty clear on this. And if I don't grant the TO and the shooter takes the shot and misses, I'll give him another one.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is ultimately the responsibility of the player to know what makes the ball dead.

Team A is holding the ball, sitting on a small lead late in the game. Coach B yells "Time out!" A1 tosses you the ball. You gonna somehow give it back to him here?

If you rule the Coach's action to be unsporting, then yes, at the division line after 2 free throws.

Or not.

But it's not the same as causing a free thrower to violate. There are different rules for free throws then there are for other live play.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I have a hard time calling this disconcertion.

I'm only going with 1 of 2 things here:

1.) Disconcertion on Coach B, ignore the violation, and A1 getting 2 free throws.

or

2.) Unsporting T on Coach B, which means ball became dead immediately, A1 gets 2 free throws, any A player gets 2 more free throws, Team A gets a throw-in at half court.

In either situation I'm not penalizing for an excess time-out as I would never have recognized the time-out request since there was Team A control.

I'm thinking all parties and my supervisors would live with #1.

[APG]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I have a hard time calling this disconcertion.

Really? I'd have a real easy time calling disconcertion here. There's no reason for the coach to be calling timeout here.