Time out

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

I find that interesting. Of course, it has never really been explained to me the origination of our rule, directive, guideline or whatever we call it when it comes from the State office.

What is the NCAAW rule?

A.R. 256:

In a game without a courtside monitor, the score is tied when the referee calls a shooting foul on Team A’s unsuccessful attempt:

(1) At approximately the same time as the game-clock horn sounds to end the game; or

(2) With four seconds remaining on the game clock.

RULING:

(1) When the official determines that the foul occurred before the sounding of the game-clock horn, and signals for the clock to stop and the timer fails to stop the clock, a timing mistake has occurred and the official shall put time back on the clock as to when the foul was called. In this case, A1 is awarded two free throws. When A1 makes the first shot, the game is over. However, when the official signals for the clock to stop and it is so near the expiration of time that the timer is unable to stop the clock, this is not a timer’s mistake and time should not be placed back on the game clock. When the official determines that the foul occurred before the sounding of the game-clock horn, A1 is awarded two free throws. When A1 makes the first shot, the game shall be over. On a foul that occurs near the expiration of time, officials must determine that the clock did not stop when the whistle sounded because a timing mistake occurred or because it was so near the expiration of time that the timer is unable to stop the clock. In the first case, time is put back on the game clock and in the second case, it is not.

It's also covered in AR 146.

And, I think it's for both NCAAW and NCAAM

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

From what we're told in Ohio, if the state changes anything that isn't a state adoption, that state is supposed to be shut out of the rules committee process entirely from the questionnaire to sitting on the committee. So I'm left to wander if Ohio isn't telling us the truth or if the NFHS is just full of it.

I have a hunch that Georgia hasn't officially implemented a rule change, but instead are operating under a directive. Sort of like the various interpretations around the country that accompanied the elbow POE.

My question for Ronnie:
A1 goes up to shoot, releases just before the buzzer, and is clobbered before he lands. The foul happens immediately after the buzzer to end the first half. You're not shooting those free throws in Georgia?

[ronny mulkey]

Originally Posted by Adam

I have a hunch that Georgia hasn't officially implemented a rule change, but instead are operating under a directive. Sort of like the various interpretations around the country that accompanied the elbow POE.

My question for Ronnie:
A1 goes up to shoot, releases just before the buzzer, and is clobbered before he lands. The foul happens immediately after the buzzer to end the first half. You're not shooting those free throws in Georgia?

Adam,

I like your word - directive. I BELIEVE the directive deals with "shot, foul, then horn". Clearly, we hear whistle immediately followed by horn. But, I'm sure it gets loosley interpreted by officials to mean "we never shoot f.throws with 0:00 showing on the clock". Thanks to your question, I will be careful on how I word this in discussions, henceforth.

In your scenario, most everyone around here would shoot them with no players on the lane followed by halftime.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

After almost sixty posts, I want to make sure that I have this straight.

Most would agree that, in regard to a charged timeout, the ball doesn't become dead when the coach requests the timeout.

Has there been a consensus that the ball does become dead when the official grants the timeout, and have we decided that the granting and the whistle sounding occur at the same time, and that any movement of the clock after that can be changed if there is definite knowledge by the official?

I think so. It isn't dead until the official blows the whistle. That is when the timeout is granted. Any time that rolls off the clock after the whistle, could be put back on, if an official has definite knowledge.

[Raymond]

Georgia/Ole Miss, 2:57 of 2nd half.

A1 elbows B1 to the face after time-out request was recognized but before whistle is blown.

Ruling: FF1 Technical charged to A1 for dead ball contact.

Don't know who's argument this advances but I know it is relevant to this conversation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Georgia/Ole Miss, 2:57 of 2nd half.

A1 elbows B1 to the face after time-out request was recognized but before whistle is blown.

Ruling: FF1 Technical charged to A1 for dead ball contact.

Don't know who's argument this advances but I know it is relevant to this conversation.

I don't like it one bit. Who knows if the official is or is not going to blow the whistle for anything. Players shouldn't be held responsible for guessing what the official will do. Until the whistle sounds, I'd say any foul that occurs is a personal.

[just another ref]

Considering this play wouldn't change anyones thinking, would it? What if the elbow was before the whistle but after a traveling violation?

By rule, the request, recognized or not, does not make the ball dead. In practice, apparently to most it does. (player request a split second before landing out of bounds) I guess we all have to make up our minds whether this will be the case, but I don't see how you can have it both ways. Editorial clarification would be swell.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

By rule, the request, recognized or not, does not make the ball dead. In practice, apparently to most it does. (player request a split second before landing out of bounds) I guess we all have to make up our minds whether this will be the case, but I don't see how you can have it both ways. Editorial clarification would be swell.

Good point about the player requesting while falling out of bounds. If he touches out of bounds before the official granting and whistle, most of us are going to ignore the out of bounds call.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Considering this play wouldn't change anyones thinking, would it? What if the elbow was before the whistle but after a traveling violation?

By rule, the request, recognized or not, does not make the ball dead. In practice, apparently to most it does. (player request a split second before landing out of bounds) I guess we all have to make up our minds whether this will be the case, but I don't see how you can have it both ways. Editorial clarification would be swell.

I think this is one of those areas where we just have to actually referee. Not everything about this game is black and white....and insisting that it be is not good for the game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think this is one of those areas where we just have to actually referee. Not everything about this game is black and white....and insisting that it be is not good for the game.

+1

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't like it one bit. Who knows if the official is or is not going to blow the whistle for anything. Players shouldn't be held responsible for guessing what the official will do. Until the whistle sounds, I'd say any foul that occurs is a personal.

Agreed. IT's always possible that the officials in the game got it wrong (or that it was reported wrong).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Agreed. IT's always possible that the officials in the game got it wrong (or that it was reported wrong).

It wasn't reported wrong. B1's team took the ball out at the division line opposite the table after B's free throws. If it wasn't a technical then B would have received the ball in the backcourt tableside.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think this is one of those areas where we just have to actually referee. Not everything about this game is black and white....and insisting that it be is not good for the game.

It sounded to me like you were advocating the black and white angle here, suggesting the elbow timing in relation to the whistle was important. If a player threw an elbow to the face, what does the timeout, or the whistle, have to do with it. He should be prepared to deal with whatever consequences that follow.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It sounded to me like you were advocating the black and white angle here, suggesting the elbow timing in relation to the whistle was important. If a player threw an elbow to the face, what does the timeout, or the whistle, have to do with it. He should be prepared to deal with whatever consequences that follow.

I was referring to the other possible elements of the timing of the timeout call...I'm not treating the start of the time the same in all respects

What if the offense coughs up the ball just before you blow the whistle for the timeout but after you hear the request and decide to sound the whistle....and you do blow the whistle. If it is me, the timeout, in that case, began when I heard it with the ball in player control....even if the ball is coming out on my whistle. But, at the same time, I'm not coming up with a technical for a play action that started during a live ball but happened to get a whistle halfway through.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Aren't states allowed to adopt their own rules?

Sure. But in doing so, they risk losing their vote on Rule Committee rule change votes.