Outside of better communication is there any other solution to this situtation?

Tie ball game, 30 seconds to go. The lead official calls a foul against the defense on a rebound/tap situation. As center, I wasn't sure if it was going to be a 2-shot foul or just a 1 and 1, but I went to get the shooter regardless. When my partner turned, he signaled for 2 shots. I told the shooter and rebounders that we had 2 shots at least twice and then bounced the ball. Of course, he missed the first one. As I was going to retrieve the ball, one of the shooter's teammates rebounded it and layed it up and in as the defense remained stationary.

My partner who had called the foul came in to inform me that it was supposed to be a 1 and 1, so the basket had to count. Is this right? Is there any other way to resolve the situation?

Correctable error.
 

You awarded FTs that were not suppose to be taken. You told the FTer and the other players that you were shooting two. That was obviously incorrect, so you do it all over again using the Correctable error procedure. You seem to notice it before the next dead ball, so you have not run out of time to correct it.

But your partner did you know favors on this at all. You just repeated his ruling or at least what he told you before the FTs.

Peace

Rut, Rut, Rut....
 

...how many times have we told you not to answer rules based questions!

This is not a correctable error situation. The only FT that was shot was merited. This is an official's error. The official's error clearly put one team at a disadvantage (players stood motionless and didn't attempt to rebound). Play should be blown dead immediately and resumed using the alternating-possession procedure.

Please, please don't answer rules questions. You're clueless!!

Cancel the basket by the shooter's teammate,and go with the AP procedure. See casebook play 8.6.1.

OK, I think we got this one figured out.
Here is another question:

Turn the situation around..... You tell the players it's 1&1 when it should be 2. If B rebounds the ball, is that considered a change of possession for the purpose of deciding which correction procedure you will use in the correction?

(i.e. Stop play, clear lane, shoot, resume play vs. line 'um up and shoot)

What if A rebounds? ~ In both, error is recognized within time restrictions. I'll give my opinion after some discussion.

Blackhawk

Correctable error
 

2.10.1b

In the original play, only one FT was merited and only one was awarded. When you turn it around, as you did, it becomes a CE.

Unlike the play above,this one is a correctible error situation--R2-10-1(a)-"failure to award a merited free throw".All you have to remember is that if you want to legally correct this error,the error has to be recognized during the period up to and including the first dead ball after the clock has started.Anything that happens up to the time that you recognize the error(points scored,time consumed,etc)isn't nullified.If there was a change in possession on the missed FT,you go with the POI after you shoot the 2nd FT.If there was no change in possession,you line 'em up for the 2nd FT.

Re: Rut, Rut, Rut....
 

Yes this is a correctable error situation. They awarded the wrong kind of FT. The players were told that it was two instead of 1 and 1. The players reacted based on wrong information. If the information was given properly, then it would not have mattered. This could not be in my eyes any kind of AP, because the information was given incorrectly by the officials. This clearly was noticed before a dead ball and should be corrected under the correctable error situation. This would only be an AP situation if the officials told them it was a 1 and 1 and the players reacted the way they did. I think you need to go back and read the entire situation or show a casebook reference that specifically addresses this sitaution. But of course you cannot so whatelse should I expect.

This cannot be an AP situation with the officials screwing this up and giving improper information. No casebook support for your application that I see.

Peace

Did you miss my post? It is NOT one of the five correctible errors,and the play IS covered explicitly in the casebook under 8.6.1(b)!!!

Hang on, Jurassic. I'll copy and paste the play for him, since ge doesn't have a case book. Not that it ill do any good.

Rut, please note that the parts in boldface are exactly the play posted in the original post.

OFFICIALS PROVIDE ERRONEOUS INFORMATION
*8.6.1 SITUATION:

A1 is about to attempt the first of a one-and-one free-throw situation. The administering official steps in and erroneously informs players that two shots will be taken. A1's first attempt is unsuccessful. The missed shot is rebounded by: (a) B1, with all other players motionless in anticipation of another throw; (b) A2, with all other players motionless in anticipation of another throw; or (c) B2, with several players from both teams attempting to secure the rebound. The officials recognize their error at this point. Ruling: In (a) and (b), the official's error clearly put one team at a disadvantage (players stood motionless and didn't attempt to rebound). Play should be blown dead immediately and resumed using the alternating-possession procedure. In (c), both teams made an attempt to rebound despite the official's error and had an equal opportunity to gain possession of the rebound. Play should continue.

It doesn't get any clearer than that.

Sorry Rut.

Had this happen to me about a week ago, went with the AP. Crappy communication on my part, with a partner I wasn't familiar with. Fortunately did not decide the game as it was just shy of a blowout.

There is a clear difference between awarding/not awarding merited free throws, and us screwing up a 2-shot/1-and-1 situation. That is why the correctable error rule is written the way it is.

It ain't Shakespeare but I still think it's pretty good. Enjoy!

http://www.toptown.com/dorms/creedst.../movie/oz4.jpg

I could while away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain

I'd unravel any riddle
For any individ'le
In trouble or in pain

(Dorothy)
With the thoughts you'd be thinkin'
You could be another Lincoln
If you only had a brain

(Scarecrow)
Oh, I would tell you why
The ocean's near the shore
I could think of things I never thunk before
And then I'd sit and think some more

I would not be just a nuffin'
My head all full of stuffin'
My heart all full of pain
I would dance and be merry
Life would be a ding-a-derry
If I only had a brain

:)

Question.
 

What was reported to the table?

Peace

Beautiful,Slappy! I watched that with my 4yr old granddaughter just last week.I got a tape of it,and she asks me about once a month to play it for her.It's one of her 3 favorite movies-the other two being ET and Scary Movie2.

Re: Question.
 

From the original post of bkiledad-quote-"My partner who has called the foul came in and informed me that it was SUPPOSED to be 1 and 1"-unquote.That means that the actual correct call WAS 1 and 1.The table must have that information for the official to say that.If you still think that this is a correctible error,please post exactly which one of the 5 that you think it should be.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 16th, 2003 at 07:03 PM]

Re: Question.
 

A foul was reported to the table.

What do you still not understand?

I hate to interrupt a good argument, but I still haven't seen an answer to my question.

Is the rebound by B1 considered the Change of Possession needed to use the old method of correction?

Maybe someone can find this situation in the Case Book.

Thanks,
Blackhawk

I answered that three hours ago,Blackhawk.

Am I the Invisible Man today?:D

Blackhawk, Jurassic and I both answered your question immediately after your post.

I understand all of this (if this is the answer you are referring to). But the question is, when does the error (and change of possession) occur?

If the error is handing the shooter the ball and saying "1&1", then it's easy, COP. But if the error occurs when A1 is not given the second shot, has the COP occurred after the error or before?

Since there is no team control on a try, is the rebound by B1 really a COP if the error is not giving the A1 the second shot?

The problem is probably my inability to effectively articulate the question.

Blackhawk

The correctible error occurs when you fail to award the 2nd merited FT.That's rule 2-10-1(a).A "change of possession" has absolutely nothing to with the fact that the error occurred,or what happens until you recognize the correctible error.The error is correctible only if you discover it during the time limits that I detailed above.That's rule 2-10-2.To take care of what happens between the time that the correctible error occurs and the error is actually discovered,you apply rule 2-10-5. The "COP" that you are talking about only comes into play when the non-FT shooting team gets possession of the ball anytime before the error is legally discovered.If there is a "COP",you go back and shoot the missed FT,and then go the POI(point of interruption)-ie-whoever had the ball when you discovered the error is gonna get it back.If there is no "COP" before the error is discovered,then you just line 'em up again and shoot the missed shot.That's rule 2-10-6.

OK now?



[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 16th, 2003 at 09:16 PM]

Here is my original post:

OK, I think we got this one figured out.
Here is another question:

Turn the situation around..... You tell the players it's 1&1 when it should be 2. If B rebounds the ball, is that considered a change of possession for the purpose of deciding which correction procedure you will use in the correction?

(i.e. Stop play, clear lane, shoot, resume play vs. line 'um up and shoot)

What if A rebounds? ~ In both, error is recognized within time restrictions. I'll give my opinion after some discussion.

Blackhawk



And after all that, which we really all should know, the answer is in (((triple parentheses))).

It was a question brought up in a tournament last weekend. Basically "Did a COP happen?", and the correct answer is yes. As JR (finally) said "Anytime the Non-FT shooting team has possession" you go to the POI correction procedure.

The game officials lined 'em up under the new rule, thinking a COP had not occurred, and did not understand my explaination as to why they were wrong. (Maybe for the same reason I had such a hard time explaining the question here.)

Blackhawk

Re: Re: Question.
 

I really do not know how you got all that information, when he did not say. There was total miscommunication and his partner originally told him that they were shooting two. Now if he originally told him they were shooting two, when did it get discovered that they were shooting one and one? Did the calling official realize he gave his partner the wrong information? Did he report something different to the table than what he told his partner? What happen before the calling official told his partner?

I can assume that you do not know the answer to this, but you seemed to want to throw your hat in this.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Question.
 

None of that matters. The case book play is exactly on point.

Re: Re: Re: Answer
 

I really do not know how you got all that information, when he did not say. There was total miscommunication and his partner originally told him that they were shooting two. Now if he originally told him they were shooting two, when did it get discovered that they were shooting one and one? Did the calling official realize he gave his partner the wrong information? Did he report something different to the table than what he told his partner? What happen before the calling official told his partner?

I can assume that you do not know the answer to this, but you seemed to want to throw your hat in this.
[/B][/QUOTE]Not one thing that you just posted above is relevant at all to the original post.Not one thing that you wrote above matters in the least to the way that the play is handled according to the RULES! It is all completely irrelevant.If you think that it is relevant,please tell me exactly why it is,and cite some rules-any rules-to support your reasoning. You stated that this was a correctible error.Please give me a rules citation that will back up that claim.You also said that there was no casebook play covering this situation.A casebook play has been quoted verbatim to you.Again,if you intend to dispute that casebook play,please tell us why,and also post a rules citation that will back up your reasoning.

In other words,Rut,please spell out exactly why Tony and I were wrong on this play,and your answer was correct!

As JR (finally) said "Anytime the Non-FT shooting team has possession" you go to the POI correction procedure.
[/QUOTE]"Finally said"? Geeze,Blackhawk,I posted the 2 sentences above in my initial response to your question five hours ago.:D

"Finally said"? Geeze,Blackhawk,I posted the 2 sentences above in my initial response to your question five hours ago.:D [/QUOTE]

JR~

The answer to the question I was TRYING to ask in not in this quote. We all know the difference between a POI correction and a "line 'um up" correction, and how a COP effects the decision. My question was weather or not the rebound by B1 constituted the COP needed to use the POI correction procedure.

The game official's ruling was that the error occurred when they did not award the second throw, at the same time B1 rebounded the first throw. Therefore, the COP did not happen after the error, and he used the "line 'um up" procedure.

Your argument of "Anytime the non-FT shooting team has possession" was the argument I used with the game official. So we agree, :) and they should have used the POI procedure. Hopefully I was able to articulate my question finally. Sorry for the confusion.

Blackhawk

Re: Re: Re: Re: Question.
 

Was I talking to you?

Peace

Was I talking to you too?
 

Why would I spell out something to individuals that were not present? You were not there. So you can obviously not answer my question. I am not asking anything about the ruling, I am asking a question about the communication that took place. You were not there, so you cannot answer my question. But you probably think you can.

Peace

Your granddaughter's got good taste (except for the Scary Movie2 part...maybe I just don't get it, after all some people just don't get Shakespeare, so what can I say...). That is one of my favorite songs in one of my favorite movies.

Somewhere, over the rainbow
It ain't snowing...

And speaking of Shakespeare, after reading to the end of this thread I am reminded on yet another quote. Enjoy:

"There was never yet philosopher that could endure the toothache patiently" Much Ado About Nothing

[Edited by Dan_ref on Feb 17th, 2003 at 02:30 PM]

"There was never yet philosopher that could endure the toothache patiently" Much Ado About Nothing

[/B][/QUOTE]I try,though! Believe it or not! :D

"out,out,damn spot"as she rubbed her hands with'GLEE'(a Scottish detergent)! MacBeth

I appreciate the case book reference... That is our case EXACTLY. I had a feeling that is what we should have done, but my partner (the one who called the foul) was so certain that we had to count the basket that I didn't argue with him... he's been doing this a lot longer than I. Apparently, this happened in a Cincinnati/Tulane game a couple of years ago and the refs on the game counted the bucket and got in enormous trouble... that's what I was told afterwards.

I was extremely pleased that the team who was screwed by our mistake ended up hitting a long "3" to win the game... very exciting finish, despite our mess-up.

Thanks for all the feedback, guys. I feel better now knowing that I wanted to do the right thing, even though I didn't. Next time I will! Although, there better never be a next time in this type of situation!