Three (3) point attempt made, then changed to a 2 point goal
 

A1 shoots a shot from behind the three point line and the trail official indicates a three point attempt. The trail official’s position is straight-line with shooters feet. The shot by A1 goes in and trail official signals the shot is good at buzzer. The lead official thinks the shooter A1 was touching the 3 point line and confronts trail official who isn’t sure it was in fact a 3 point attempt. Trail official then asked the table what they saw. Table personnel agree with lead official that A1’s toes where on the 3 point line. Trail official waves off the 3 point goal and instructs table to change to a 2 point goal for Team A. Team A lost the game by 1 point. <b> Was the correct method applied to wave off the 3 point goal? <b>

I'm not asking the table whether whether a shot was a two or a three. I don't know how they would have any better of an angle than the trail or lead. Also, the lead shouldn't go to the trail unless he's certain that the trail got the call incorrect.

The L thinks? Either I know (as the L) or I stay the hell out of it. And the table would never, ever be consulted, unless I was working a game where a monitor was in place and reviewable.

Are you getting this info 1st-hand, 2nd-hand, or 3rd-hand?

As described, no, this was not handled correctly.

Assuming the play was in the Trail's PCA, what was the Lead doing looking there anyway? No way as a Lead would I have changed that unless I was absolutely certain beyond any doubt that he had missed it.

It was a last second shot. All officials should have an opinion on the last second shot. Still the lead shouldn't be going to the trail unless he has absolute knowledge that he missed a three vs. two.

Reference the video from a few weeks ago. On a last second shot where the horn will go near the release of the shot, the L should also be getting a look.

If a non-calling official thinks something other than anyone else whose opinion matters, they do nothing.

My provincial interpreter said this years ago: if they know that an error was made, they should kill the clock immediately, and change the call.

Another approach is to kill the clock, and offer information to the calling official.

These two methods are preferred because the non-calling official can often kill the clock before the ball is live again.

Yet another approach is to let the play go and offer information at the next clock stoppage. This is problematic because you might have a long period of time go by before a clock stoppage.

Ultimately, it could be "when in Rome situation."

The next clock stoppage might make the correctable error time period pass.

Over 90% of the games I referee are filmed.

I am betting there is video proof, If I am the Lead, I stay out of it unless I know for certain.

If it's not my primary, why am I looking out there? Glance, but not looking.

On a last second shot, I'm going out wide (as I would in 2-person) and am getting a look. In my world, we can't go to the monitor and since the horn's going off right after the shot, it would take something intentional or flagrant for me to need to see anything else.

+1

A last second shot is a time when it's acceptable to ball watch. As an off ball official, you're not really going to have to worry too much about screens and holds because everyone's attention is focused on the player with the ball and getting the shot up. Also, I want to be able to help my partner if he asks for help, or if he truly butchers the call.

Good catch. My vote = shut it down.

Yea, I wasn't thinking the last second shot think. Still, unless the L is absolutely certain, he doesn't need to make the call as the T should have the best angle on the play. I assume this was a two whistle game since there was no mention of the C who would most likely had a good angle on it as well.

I had a play in Friday's game where I was trail and C signaled for a 3 at about the intersection of our two areas. Kid's toe was clearly on the line. He gave the field goal sign and I whistled before the inbound could take place. I went over to my partner and told him I clearly saw the foot on the line. He changed it to a 2. I was tableside and advised the scorer, timer, HC [who knew and said that his foot was clearly on the line] & VC [who happened to request a TO after the made basket].

Seems to me that most of us are discounting the possibility that the shot we are talking about was a "deep corner" three. If that is the case, especially on a last second shot, the lead may actually be in a better position to see the shooter's feet than the trail.

Absent that situation, however, I agree with everyone else. Lead has no business going to the T unless he is absolutely certain the call was missed. I also agree that the table should not have been consulted. The book lets us consult the timer if the question is whether the shot was released in time; there is no provision for consulting the table for a 2 vs. 3 call.

It's being discounted because it's impossible given the scenario posted in the OP.

I don't suppose it's actually impossible, but it would make for an interesting discussion in the locker room after the game about properly working for a good angle as the ball goes away from you at trail...

Unless the T is sitting two feet off the end line, there's no way he gets a straightline view of the feet on a deep-corner three.

That's my point. It would make for a good discussion. :D

And some folks say that subtlety is a lost art. Snaq, I'm good with the red font, but 275 point type? Maybe just a bit over the top?

As you know, sometimes discussions that begin with a particular play situation evolve into a discussion of overall philosophy. I (incorrectly) assumed we were talking generally about whether it is ever acceptable for lead to offer information to the trail on a 3-point shot.

That having been said, the point you make is certainly well-taken. In the immortal words of Emily Litella, "That's very different. Never mind." :D

LOL, yeah it was over the top. Overall stressful day, sorry.

From the source, one of the two game officials.

No prob. I'm not a frequent poster, but I am a frequent reader. I figured you were having a bad day. Happens to all of us. ;)

Yes, is it ever acceptable for the lead to offer information to the trail on a 3-point shot, and is it conceivable that a crew would consult with table on plays such as this?

I would hope other ref's could offer good advice for those officials involved, along with me wanting to know your thoughts.

I would not want to consult the table unless another official wearing stripes was sitting there as part of the table crew. Somewhat like during regional and state playoffs.