Time out

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

You know we're not talking about free throws any more?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

You know we're not talking about free throws any more?

Ah, you didn't specify that (although I see how it's all but obvious from your post now), so I didn't make the switch.

No, I wouldn't in that case. Chances are, I'd let it hit me and drop. Lower level ball, I'd tap it back to him and tell him to play on. But as somone else noted, free throws have different rules of conduct.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Ah, you didn't specify that (although I see how it's all but obvious from your post now), so I didn't make the switch.

No, I wouldn't in that case. Chances are, I'd let it hit me and drop. Lower level ball, I'd tap it back to him and tell him to play on. But as somone else noted, free throws have different rules of conduct.

The bottom line is, in my opinion, there are circumstances in which a coach may yell for a timeout, either when he has none, or when it would not be properly granted, or both, and it may still be neither illegal nor unsporting. The coach may start yelling intentionally early to make sure he gets it as soon as possible. Even the case play has slack in it. It specifies verbal tactics by a player. The coach may yell "Timeout" to get the attention of an official, then when he gets it, says, "After the free throw." The shooter hears timeout, tosses the ball away, then what?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Even the case play has slack in it.

Where's the slack in case book play 5.8.3SitE(a)? In both cases, you have a TO request erroneously granted during a live ball.

We don't know for sure if the calling official granted that TO request while the FT shooter was still holding the ball, but we do know he administered the subsequent play as if he did. If it happened that way, I'm giving the TO-calling team a "T".

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Where's the slack in case book play 5.8.3SitE(a)? In both cases, you have a TO request erroneously granted during a live ball.

We don't know for sure if the calling official granted that TO request while the FT shooter was still holding the ball, but we do know he administered the subsequent play as if he did. If it happened that way, I'm giving the TO-calling team a "T".

As you said yourself, you don't know when the official granted the timeout. According to the description, the request was made, after which the player threw the ball to the official, after which players "started leaving the lane," after which the whistle blew. I think it is fair to assume the timeout was not (improperly) granted while the shooter was still holding the ball.

By the way, exactly when a timeout is granted is not defined in the rules. An editorial revision is needed.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

By the way, exactly when a timeout is granted is not defined in the rules. An editorial revision is needed.

It when the whistle is sounded. That is the only logical reason for the timer to stop the clock and the players to cease action. It is also the only one of the rules under 6-7 for making the ball dead which applies to time-out requests during a live ball.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It when the whistle is sounded. That is the only logical reason for the timer to stop the clock and the players to cease action. It is also the only one of the rules under 6-7 for making the ball dead which applies to time-out requests during a live ball.

When I suggested something to this effect once, an angry mob formed.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It when the whistle is sounded. That is the only logical reason for the timer to stop the clock and the players to cease action. It is also the only one of the rules under 6-7 for making the ball dead which applies to time-out requests during a live ball.

Here we go again. Can I just summarize the argument that will now ensue so we can all skip having it?

"No, it isn't."

"Yes, it is."

Thank you.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The bottom line is, in my opinion, there are circumstances in which a coach may yell for a timeout, either when he has none, or when it would not be properly granted, or both, and it may still be neither illegal nor unsporting. The coach may start yelling intentionally early to make sure he gets it as soon as possible. Even the case play has slack in it. It specifies verbal tactics by a player. The coach may yell "Timeout" to get the attention of an official, then when he gets it, says, "After the free throw." The shooter hears timeout, tosses the ball away, then what?

Benefit to the shooter, and not to the coach, whose reaction indicated (not proved) he knew exactly what he was doing.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Benefit to the shooter, and not to the coach, whose reaction indicated (not proved) he knew exactly what he was doing.

And +1 back at ya.....

The Golden Rule is always penalize the azzholes who are giving you problems( aka penalize whomever might try to get an unfair advantage not intended by rule in any situations like this).