Successive Time Outs
 

Test question I missed:
"A successive timeout is one that is granted to either team before the ball becomes live following the previous time-out."

I put true for this can anyone tell me why it's wrong?

Compare that statement with the precise wording of 4-43-2 and see how the two differ in phraseology and significance.

Hint: There's a difference between the ball becoming live and the clock starting . . .

Questions like this...
 

...tick me off, even though I understand the reason for them.

Rule 4-43-2 states that a successive time-out is "one which is granted to either team before the clock has started following the previous time-out.

Thanks Freddy! Picky *******s but relevant due to my confusion!
So if at the end of the fourth quarter with the score tied, coach A gets a technical. Coach B then requests a time out and it is granted. If time out is requested again by either coach before the second technical free throw is taken, it will be denied since the clock never started, however the ball did become live on the first free throw. I see the slight difference.

Caveat Officialus
 

Gotta be careful in the situation you cited. With the game tied, that technical is technically still part of the fourth quarter exclusive of any extra period that may or not be necessary, since the results of the free throw would determine the outcome of the game (state test question on that this year). Then, regarding successive time-outs, 5-11-7 says, "Successive time-outs, as in 4-43-2, shall not be granted after the expiration of playing time for the fourth quarter or any extra period." So, seems to me, Coach B's request shouldn't have been granted if it was requested with the game tied, prior to the time that "the ball has become live to start the extra period(s), ala 5-11-5.
Tricky stuff, techinically.
Am I on the right track with this?

Why? The quarter ended...

5.6 Comment B

Then, 5.12.3 Situation B

What is 5-11-5?

No.

One TO can be granted after time expires (but before the quarter ends).

I assume (yeah, I know) that Loudwhistle's situation had the T occuring just as / before time expired (but the clock couldn't be stopped before it expired and no official had definite knowledge of the time ...). So, the T was part of the fourth quarter, and the FTs would be shot even if the score was tied. Here, one TO is allowed.

If the period ended and THEN Coach A got the T, we'd start the OT with the FTS because the game was tied.

Errata
 

No use sitting here wrong when I can stand corrected. :o

The sitch in our test dealt with technical free throws that would be shot as part of the fourth quarter because the need to have an extra period was not yet determined -- the shooting team was down by 1.

Thanx for the correction, guys. I'm spending the rest of the afternoon reviewing 5-11 as my act of penance.

Issues with your example situation have already been addressed.

You might also see successive time outs taken in a more routine situation: near the end of the game, A (trailing) makes a basket and B calls time out to call a play. As they return from the TO, the ball becomes live when at B's disposal for the throw-in. When the B coach sees the defense A is using (press/ no press, etc.) the coach might want another time out to change the play.

Live ball, but no clock has run. The test question is pressing on your grasp of the distinction between live ball and clock running. Important distinction, IMO.

Yes, I definitely agree, very important. And yet another rule I better grasp thanks to this forum.