TO request when you have no timeouts

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Actually, I don't think it's neccessary. I just find it interesting that on this subject the consensus of opinion is a strict attitude of only doing what the rule book says is required of us, but on so many other subjects we have long discussions about how one or another of us extends his/her actions in the name of "game management, preventive officiating, etc."
I'm fine with not informing the coach(es) of their remaining TO's, and strictly following the instruction to inform them when they have no TO's remaining. My point is more a query into the tradition of taking the rule to do so as a statement prohibiting any other communication with the coach(es) regarding their TO's, when the rule doesn't state what not to do.
In our area, year after year, the feedback from the coaches, lists their overwhelming concern, and complaint, about our officials as the perceived unwillingness to talk to them.

There is a big reason to only tell them when they're out.

If you tell them 1 and they really have none, they have a good reason to gripe when they take it, find out they have none, then get a T. If you're wrong when you tell them 0, then there really is no problem. It can be investigated and corrected with no consequence.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

There is a big reason to only tell them when they're out.

If you tell them 1 and they really have none, they have a good reason to gripe when they take it, find out they have none, then get a T. If you're wrong when you tell them 0, then there really is no problem. It can be investigated and corrected with no consequence.

There could still be a problem. (name ANYTHING we do that has no potential for a problem) If you say he has none when he really has one, then his player gets trapped and turns the ball over and the coach would have called a timeout, that could be (rightfully) perceived by the coach as a problem.

[JRutledge]

I do not even go out of my way to tell a coach he is out of timeouts. Most of the time I do not say anything honestly. The coaches already know most of the time anyway and the if the table decides to tell us, I might mention it if I am by their bench. Otherwise, coaches should know or their scorekeeper already tells them.

Peace

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

By rule it's the ONLY time we should notify the coaches how many time-outs they have. What is the purpose of doing it any other time? We always say ACs need to know their role and place in the game, so why is it alright for us to intrude on their territory?

This is overstating it. By rule, there is one time we must inform the coach how many time-outs are left. The rules are silent as to whether we should or should not indicate the number remaining in other circumstances.

It's a bad idea but it's not against the rules.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not even go out of my way to tell a coach he is out of timeouts. Most of the time I do not say anything honestly. The coaches already know most of the time anyway and the if the table decides to tell us, I might mention it if I am by their bench. Otherwise, coaches should know or their scorekeeper already tells them.

Peace

You should as it's a required duty of an official.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

You should as it's a required duty of an official.

It is required for the scorekeeper to inform the coach through us. It is not required for us to ever find out what the timeout situation is for their team. This is not football, we do not keep track of that situation ourselves.

This is clearly stated in Rule 2-11-6.

It is not our duty, it is the scorer's duty. If they do not tell us anything, I do not ask. And I repeat, they already know. Now if they ask me while I am near their huddle (which is very rare) I will find out for them to be sure, but not something I do on my own. And it has worked that way all these years, I do not see any reason to do anything different. I want to stay away from benches as much as possible.

Peace

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is required for the scorekeeper to inform the coach through us. It is not required for us to ever find out what the timeout situation is for their team. This is not football, we do not keep track of that situation ourselves.

This is clearly stated in Rule 2-11-6.

It is not our duty, it is the scorer's duty. If they do not tell us anything, I do not ask. And I repeat, they already know. Now if they ask me while I am near their huddle (which is very rare) I will find out for them to be sure, but not something I do on my own. And it has worked that way all these years, I do not see any reason to do anything different. I want to stay away from benches as much as possible.

Peace

I'm sorry, you're wrong. It is our duty. 2-7-11 "Notifying the head coach when a team is granted its final allowable time-out." is an officials' general duty.

Yes, they already know (or should anyways). That doesn't relieve us of our duty to inform them.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I'm sorry, you're wrong. It is our duty. 2-7-11 "Notifying the head coach when a team is granted its final allowable time-out." is an officials' general duty.

Yes, they already know (or should anyways). That doesn't relieve us of our duty to inform them.

Then how are you going to know? Do you keep track with a pad in your pocket? Do you go buy the scoreboard if that information is on the scoreboard (like the possession arrow)?

This is not about being right, how are you going to even know what their timeout situation is in the first place?

If you want to go spending your time at the table, be my guest. I am not doing that and I think I am OK doing what I have been doing. No one cares about this but guys like you. Never had a single supervisor care and even had people suggest we have to be careful with what we tell coaches as if that information is wrong, who do you think they are going to claim told them the wrong information if we are constantly telling them stuff?

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

This is overstating it. By rule, there is one time we must inform the coach how many time-outs are left. The rules are silent as to whether we should or should not indicate the number remaining in other circumstances.

..

Overstated what? The rule tells us the only time we are required to. Where did I say the rules forbid anything else?

Why do officials feel the need to interject themselves into that portion of the game needlessly? Let the AC's do their job.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Overstated what? The rule tells us the only time we are required to. Where did I say the rules forbid anything else?

Right here:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

By rule it's the ONLY time we should notify the coaches how many time-outs they have.

It gives the one time we must notify. You are incorrectly extending it to only time we should notify. Those are different.

Why do officials feel the need to interject themselves into that portion of the game needlessly? Let the AC's do their job.

I don't know. I agree we shouldn't but that's different from saying the rules give instruction on the issue.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Right here:



It gives the one time we must notify. You are incorrectly extending it to only time we should notify. Those are different.



I don't know. I agree we shouldn't but that's different from saying the rules give instruction on the issue.

You and I obviously do not comprehend the English language the same way.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Right here:



It gives the one time we must notify. You are incorrectly extending it to only time we should notify. .

You are confusing the words "should" and "may."