Correctable Error

[michblue]

Saw this play in a game recently with a 2 person crew.....

Home Team at the FT line for a free throw attempt...As thrower releases the attempt B1 enters early (delayed violation) and L on baseline indicates the delayed violation with proper mechanic signal. FT is missed...no whistle from either official....B1 rebounds..play goes the other end...B3 shoots...shot is rebounded by A2...play comes back the other way....A4 shoots the ball and makes their shot...as the ball goes through the net...T official stops play and confers with L official on baseline. Both agree that missed delayed violation call is a correctable error (failure to award a merited FT)....Crew brings the correct shooter back to the FT line with unoccupied lane spaces....allow the FT attempt...and the give the ball back to Team B for end line throw-in as that is the POI.

I say this is a correct enforcement. Am I wrong?

[Smitty]

That does not sound like a correctable error to me. Do we go back two plays to call a travel we didn't blow? Nobody blew a whistle on a lane violation. Whoops. Play on.

[just another ref]

I don't see this as a CE. This was not a failure to award a free throw, it was a failure to call a violation.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Smitty

That does not sound like a correctable error to me. Do we go back two plays to call a travel we didn't blow? Nobody blew a whistle on a lane violation. Whoops. Play on.

I was thinking this also. Why would it be caught, then no whistle to follow?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I don't see this as a CE. This was not a failure to award a free throw, it was a failure to call a violation.

I can see both arguments and I'm not sure which side I fall on. Every other violation called gets an immediate whistle, so no whistle, no violation. On the other hand, this violation is called via a hand signal at first with the whistle only if it's to be penalized.

In the heat of the moment I think I'd go with not correctable but I'm not sure.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I can see both arguments and I'm not sure which side I fall on. Every other violation called gets an immediate whistle, so no whistle, no violation. On the other hand, this violation is called via a hand signal at first with the whistle only if it's to be penalized.

The hand signal is what it is. Alone it means nothing. If there is no whistle afterward, there was no violation called.

[michblue]

I see this side of the argument. My main question is because of the signal (although no whistle) did they fail to award a merited FT because the delayed violation would make the original FT null and void?

We hear coaches all the time when officials "tweets" signals a violation..but another official (on the same play) signals a fist (but does not "tweet" the whistle) "hey hey your partner has a foul or your partner has something different."

I talked with another official in my local association who said this official was right because it was a correctable error that was enforced properly and that the official did was right for the game.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by michblue

I see this side of the argument. My main question is because of the signal (although no whistle) did they fail to award a merited FT because the delayed violation would make the original FT null and void?

It would have, but they didn't call the violation. A delayed violation by itself is no violation at all.

[Camron Rust]

Not a CE. For it to have been a CE, they would have had to actually call it then not give the replacement FT. As it was, it was not called.

[knockitoff]

Put a "X" in the Incorrect No-Call column.

[maven]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not a CE. For it to have been a CE, they would have had to actually call it then not give the replacement FT. As it was, it was not called.

This.

The error was failing to call the violation. If I failed to call a shooting foul, should we say that's a CE for failing to award a merited free throw?

(That's a rhetorical question, Adam.)