You keep going back to the pretty lights.

That is too much work. If their is a problem the teams need to monitor this themselves and if there is an issue make it clear to the officials to find the mistake. Otherwise double checking everything is silly to me. I have had coaches go crazy when they feel a point was not awarded in the middle of the game so if they allow that to take place with the final score, same on them. Because even if you look you do not know there was a mistake made or someone was not deliberately making a mistake. I know of almost no officials that I have worked with that do this or suggest to do this.

Peace

R: OK, you guys match?
VSC: Yes.
HSC: Yes sir. We've both got...
R: OK, see ya next time. Thanks guys. <trots off>
HSC: 59-59, wait, where's he going?
VSC: I don't know. Should we stop him?
HSC: I don't know, maybe he's got to get something before overtime...
VSC: Weird. Hey, where'd you go to get your shirt?

A quick glance at the running score isn't that much work.

Not necessary, nor your job per the rules book.

The scorer and timer need to be trusted to do their duties. If they don't, then the school administration and the state office will sort it out.

I'm not going over and looking at the book before leaving.

Edit: Allow me to be clear--the referee does have a duty to "check and approve" the score at the end of each half. What constitutes this is not clearly defined (perhaps one could contend that leaving the visual confines amounts to this, but that is doubtful even with that text), but I've never heard anyone state that it means physically looking at the book oneself. The NCAA has a protocol which merely involves making eye contact with the scorer and then moving off the court unless the scorer alerts the R to a problem.

+1

Me either. How many people ever actually do this?

No. I'm going by the fact that the scorer has indicated that they have the same thing as the pretty lights. If they later, after the officials leave the floor, determine that they made a mistake, it can't be corrected.

So since "it can't be corrected," what do you wish to now let stand--what the scorer told/indicated to the officials or what was actually written down in the official book by the scorer?

Let me ask this:
At the expiration of time in the 4th quarter the scoreboard shows 59-59.
Prior to the jump ball to begin the extra period, the scorer counts up the points recorded for the 4th quarter in his book. He finds that Team A only has 58 points and that the scoreboard operator must have mistakenly posted an extra point sometime during the final quarter, and alerts the referee.

Team A had possession for the last 38 seconds of the 4th quarter and missed a try for goal at the horn.

Team A coach states that he would not have held the ball for the final 38 seconds of the quarter if he had known that his team was behind by one.

Make your ruling as the R.

That is easy....a correction can be made up to the time the officials leave the court OR the ball becomes live to start OT. Once the ball is live, the OT is played regardless of any correction.

I don't see how that applies to this case. In this case, the scorer made an error in indicating that score was not tied...we don't go over to verify that they are recording/reading the results correctly. The officials left the floor based on the scorer's validation of the final score not being tied. Realizing later that it wasn't tied is no different than realizing they didn't record something properly.

I'd want to say "too bad so sad - fire your damn scorekeeper"

True. So now which do YOU go with--the book or the board?
All true again, and yet now I have presented you with the reverse situation. So again which do YOU go with--what the scorer and board said or what is written in the book?

You're going with an entirely different situation. The point being discussed is jurisdiction and what the official has approved, not what they should go with. If I'm on the court still, I may go with either one after I investigate what the discrepancy is. Either the book or the board could be wrong. If I can't figure out the difference, it will be the book. But, again, that isn't what we're discussing.

When the officials leave the court approving a score, their jurisdiction ends. That much is clear. It doesn't matter if the score they approve is subsequently found to be inaccurate. It doesn't matter which score is official if they declare another score to be the final. In doing so, they have, even if they are wrong in their conclusion, effectively declared one to be correct and the other to be incorrect...which is something the referee has the authority to do. If the state wants to reopen the game and declare that it wasn't actually over they can certainly do so but from the perspective of the officials, the game is over as they approved it.

Just as you play OT once you start it even if the official book said the game was not tied...you don't go back and cancel OT. Likewise, once the officials leave the court, you don't go back and continue the game. Not sure why you're dragging this on. The game is over.

I think we all agree the game is over.

The scenario is this: At the end of the game the scoreboard reads 60-59 and the official scorebook reads 59-59. The scorer has failed, for whatever reason, to make the officials aware of the discrepancy before they leave the visual confines of the court and thereby approving the final score.

Again, we all agree that, barring intervention from the appropriate state authority, the game is over.

As far as I can tell, you maintain the final score is 60-59.

I, NR and others maintain the final score is 59-59.

It appears to me that you think the officials are approving the score on the scoreboard (thus MD's stating you go back to the lights) rather than approving the running score in the official scorebook.