Apparently this happened at the WA state 3A Boys tournament. The following is taken directly from the Seattle P-I describing the play:

"West Valley scored on its next trip down, which led to one of the more bizarre moments of the day. As WV coach Jamie Nilles gave a hand signal for his team to press the Irish, a referee misinterpreted the call as a timeout for the Eagles before O'Dea inbounded the ball.

Nilles explained it wasn't a timeout call and the referees decided it was an inadvertent whistle. The refs then checked the possession arrow and gave the ball back to the Eagles."

Now, question is, was this the proper way to handle the situation.

I intrepret this description as WV makes a basket, before ball is inbounded, WV coach makes signal for press, confusing refs, causing the inadverant whistle.

Should the possession arrow have been used in this case?

Rule 6-3-3e states that the alternating possession should be used when: "The ball becomes dead when neither team is in control and no goal or infraction or end of a quarter or extra period is involved."

It appears that the refs thought there was no team control (4-2-6) which would appear correct. But since this followed a made basket, shouldn't they have ordered O'Dea's ball since they were inbounding after a made basket?

(Ron, or anyone else who may have witnessed this, please correct any of the above situation that may have happened differently than reported.

How I Would Have Handled the Sitch...
 

Short of being able to cite a rule or a case book play, I would have briefly gotten the two coaches together, explained that I had an inadvertant whistle, and then would have given the ball to O'Dea for a running-the-baseline throw-in.

Re: How I Would Have Handled the Sitch...
 

That is exactly how it should have been handled.

Heck, if I am the coach and I am down a point after a made basket with little time left I am calling any play that sounds like a timeout (provided the arrow is in my favor) to get the ball back for an "inadvertant whistle".

Ball through the hoop, no AP

J.A. nailed it.

[Quote]Originally posted by NYBAREF
Should the possession arrow have been used in this case?[Quote]

I wouldn't have....hmmmmm, in fact I didn't last week when I thought the Coach was calling a time out and had an "inadvertant whistle". (Remember that Scott?);)

Good thing it was on Friday, when the evaluations were already in!

I know BigDogs...I should have heard and seen the request before blowing the whistle. :)

RD

OK, so ball through the hoop, no AP.

How about Team A travels, Team B awarded at ball on sideline.

Coach makes weird signal, inadvertant whistle ...

Now what?

Ball is already dead from the travel whistle (an infraction). Give the ball to B, no AP.

You must remember that the use of AP for an inadvertent whistle was meant to apply to LIVE ball situations where there is no team control. The use of the term "ball becomes dead" in the rulebook means that the inadvertent whistle caused the ball to become dead.

ie. A1 shoots and misses, rebound tips off B1's hand and goes to the corner, three players scramble for it and inadvertent whistle occurs. No team control, inadvertent stoppage in play, therefore AP.

While the ball is technically dead after the ball goes through the hoop, it is live when the scored-upon team gets the ball on the baseline for the throw-in, and that's why it's included as an exception.

[Edited by canuckrefguy on Mar 12th, 2003 at 04:45 PM]

For the record, I've actually agreed with you from the beginning, I just wanted to 1) make sure I was right, and 2) put it up for discussion.

:)

C O O L

One day I'll actually start one of those threads that is 4-5 pages long.

What is the longest thread that you guys have ever seen?

Don't even go there.

Chuck or JRut, you wanna handle this?

(go back a week or so and find the thread titled "People Skills")

This is the proper interp. IMO ~ When the spirit/intent and advantage/disadvantage principles are implemented, this is the only thing that makes since to me.

Blackhawk

Hard to believe that three officials all good enough to work the state tournament could get this wrong, but I understand the logic. We had a game this season, late in OT, we are up by 6 or so. The opponents' have the ball, and the official thinks he hears the opponents' coach request a timeout, so he blows whistle. As he looks at the opponents' coach, it's clear that he wasn't requesting timeout. So the official says "inadvertant whistle", and something in my brain clicks and I start yelling that they should go to the arrow! After I thought about it, I knew I was wrong, but there was definitely some thought in my head that equated inadverant whistle to alternating possession.

Hard to believe a Coach that thinks he is good enough to Referee, would get this wrong...but I understand the logic.

RD