Final answer.

 

Team A keeps the two points scored on the basket.

 

The play is correctable.

 

Team A gets their 1 and 1 with the lane cleared.

 

Team B then gets the ball.

 

The play is correctable when its discovered during the dead ball (basket made). All action prior to discovery counts.

 

What it doesn't say in the rulebook is at this point plan on a)being very patient with the coach of B who doesn't know the rule and b)more than likely the next whistle will be for a technical on Team B.

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Would definitely not want the job of explaining this one. This is why it is important to have an experienced book keeper and score keeper, to keep these problems from happening, but sometimes they happen even with the best help.

Not usually the case. They are told to stand at the end of games if there is a problem. The horn has to be used in the case of correctable errors. If not, then the window for correcting the situation may pass.

 

ATM, your should continue -- once a basket is scored, the ball is dead. It becomes live again when at the disposal of the thrower.

 

This is the "Window Closing" that you referred to.

 

And I agree with everyone else, I would not want the job of explaining this one.

ATM, your should continue -- once a basket is scored, the ball is dead. It becomes live again when at the disposal of the thrower.

 

This is the "Window Closing" that you referred to.

 

And I agree with everyone else, I would not want the job of explaining this one.

Trust me, NO GOOD official is going to give team A the basket AND the free throws, regardless of how the rule reads. The horn does not stop the game, only a whistle. So in this situation I would say the official will say the ball was dead upon entering the basket and became alive again before the official's whistle. Thus, the basket counts and the error is NOT correctable because the ball has become alive again after being dead.

Trust me, NO GOOD official is going to give team A the basket AND the free throws, regardless of how the rule reads. The horn does not stop the game, only a whistle. So in this situation I would say the official will say the ball was dead upon entering the basket and became alive again before the official's whistle. Thus, the basket counts and the error is NOT correctable because the ball has become alive again after being dead.

 

Good officials correct the situation which by the way was an error by the score keepers and not the officials. The official job is to make sure the rules are applied correctly. It is a correctable error because it was discovered prior to the first dead ball after the clock has been properly started. So all that to say.....I don't trust you. :thumb:

Good officials correct the situation which by the way was an error by the score keepers and not the officials. The official job is to make sure the rules are applied correctly. It is a correctable error because it was discovered prior to the first dead ball after the clock has been properly started. So all that to say.....I don't trust you. :thumb:

 

Nice work, my friend.

Good officials correct the situation which by the way was an error by the score keepers and not the officials. The official job is to make sure the rules are applied correctly. It is a correctable error because it was discovered prior to the first dead ball after the clock has been properly started. So all that to say.....I don't trust you. :thumb:

 

ATM, you are absolutely correct.

 

This is why it is IMPERATIVE on ALL LEVELS that the schools provide a competant person to keep the book. I will agree that in 99% of the varsity games, the book keeper will not miss this one and if they do it is already on the scoreboard. Additionally, in most games an experienced official will know when they are getting close to the bonus. But mistakes happen.

 

This type of problem is especially prevalent in the Frosh and JV level when you have students and volunteers at the table. It is also a good way to get a less experienced official into a very sticky situation that he or she cannot get easily out of.

 

Any coach / fan / parent etc. who is reading this and is concerned about the quality of table personell that our school(s) enlist, should step up and volunteer to help out. The KHSAA provides a clinic each year for official scorers and timers. Go to http://www.nfhs.org/Workarea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2867

to view the duties of the scorer and timer.:thumb:

Good officials correct the situation which by the way was an error by the score keepers and not the officials. The official job is to make sure the rules are applied correctly. It is a correctable error because it was discovered prior to the first dead ball after the clock has been properly started. So all that to say.....I don't trust you. :thumb:

Believe you will NEVER see this situation administered by giving team A BOTH the basket and the free throws. The intent of the rules are to correct a situation in a manner that does not give a team an unfair advantage because an official scorer has made an error. If you don't believe me ask ANY official you respect and ask them if they would give team both the basket AND the free throws. As was mentioned earlier, there is no way you could explain why team A got both the basket and the free throws to the opposing coach, especially if he were the visiting coach, BECAUSE it is an unfair administration of the rules.

Believe you will NEVER see this situation administered by giving team A BOTH the basket and the free throws. The intent of the rules are to correct a situation in a manner that does not give a team an unfair advantage because an official scorer has made an error. If you don't believe me ask ANY official you respect and ask them if they would give team both the basket AND the free throws. As was mentioned earlier, there is no way you could explain why team A got both the basket and the free throws to the opposing coach, especially if he were the visiting coach, BECAUSE it is an unfair administration of the rules.

 

I don't beleive that in the definition of a "good official" it says anywhere that they change the rules to make the situation "more fair". This is not a situation where the rules allow any leniency. No matter how you sort it out, there is only one RIGHT WAY to correct this error. I agree that it is an unfair solution and that it will more than likely ruin any good relationship between a coach and official, but it is the RIGHT WAY.

 

Also, who it applies to doesn't matter. An uneducated home coach would be just as livid as a visitor. The rules don't dictate "fairness" or different treatment for the Home nor Away team.

 

Please examine your copy of the Rules Book and Case Book. Get back to me with the example where they say to fix it some other way.

 

Thanks

Believe you will NEVER see this situation administered by giving team A BOTH the basket and the free throws. The intent of the rules are to correct a situation in a manner that does not give a team an unfair advantage because an official scorer has made an error. If you don't believe me ask ANY official you respect and ask them if they would give team both the basket AND the free throws. As was mentioned earlier, there is no way you could explain why team A got both the basket and the free throws to the opposing coach, especially if he were the visiting coach, BECAUSE it is an unfair administration of the rules.

 

I have asked officials I respect an they all would correct it according to the rules and give team A the basket and free throws. It is not an "unfair" administration of the rules. You don't take away the right of team A to shoot the free throws if the mistake is correctable. Also, you most certainly can explain it to the opposing coach. By rule it is a correctable error, case closed.

Believe you will NEVER see this situation administered by giving team A BOTH the basket and the free throws. The intent of the rules are to correct a situation in a manner that does not give a team an unfair advantage because an official scorer has made an error. If you don't believe me ask ANY official you respect and ask them if they would give team both the basket AND the free throws. As was mentioned earlier, there is no way you could explain why team A got both the basket and the free throws to the opposing coach, especially if he were the visiting coach, BECAUSE it is an unfair administration of the rules.

 

CD, some like you argue using the "it seems like it should be this" rulebook.

 

Others, like ATM, use the actual rulebook.

 

You may not like the rule but you can't ask officials to do something else when its clearly stated not only in the rule description but also in the case book as to how to handle such a situation.

CD, some like you argue using the "it seems like it should be this" rulebook.

 

Others, like ATM, use the actual rulebook.

 

You may not like the rule but you can't ask officials to do something else when its clearly stated not only in the rule description but also in the case book as to how to handle such a situation.

 

I have never said the rule doesn't read that way. I also wasn't saying it would vary depending on which coach would be upset. I am saying the next time an official administers it that way you let me know.

There are many situations that require an official to use common sense.

i.e. team A steals the ball and is going in for an uncontested lay-up when the coach of team B stands up and yells an obsenity at the official. By rule the official should call a technical foul immediately which deprives team A of their attempt at the lay-up. Is that the way all of you would call it?

Just an example of a play that has actually happened in a game I officiated. I waited until the lay-up was made and then called the technical. You actually believe that was wrong? With 30+ years officiating I could give you many examples such as this. I stand by my statement that the next time an official would give a team the basket and free throws in you original situation would be the first time it has happened.

I have never said the rule doesn't read that way. I also wasn't saying it would vary depending on which coach would be upset. I am saying the next time an official administers it that way you let me know.

There are many situations that require an official to use common sense.

i.e. team A steals the ball and is going in for an uncontested lay-up when the coach of team B stands up and yells an obsenity at the official. By rule the official should call a technical foul immediately which deprives team A of their attempt at the lay-up. Is that the way all of you would call it?

Just an example of a play that has actually happened in a game I officiated. I waited until the lay-up was made and then called the technical. You actually believe that was wrong? With 30+ years officiating I could give you many examples such as this. I stand by my statement that the next time an official would give a team the basket and free throws in you original situation would be the first time it has happened.

 

Where does it say by rule that the referee has to immediately call a T ? Just like we follow the rulebook on CEs we also follow the rulebook/casebook which specifically lists the example you cite and we are told to withhold our whistle until the play finishes.

 

So, again, we are following the book.

 

You could be right on your feeling that it doesn't happen very often but that's probably for two reasons. First, CEs rarely happen and , thus, this specific example of a CE rarely, rarely if ever happens. Secondly, many officials do not know the rule.

Edited November 26, 200916 yr by Clyde

I have never said the rule doesn't read that way. I also wasn't saying it would vary depending on which coach would be upset. I am saying the next time an official administers it that way you let me know.

There are many situations that require an official to use common sense.

i.e. team A steals the ball and is going in for an uncontested lay-up when the coach of team B stands up and yells an obsenity at the official. By rule the official should call a technical foul immediately which deprives team A of their attempt at the lay-up. Is that the way all of you would call it?

Just an example of a play that has actually happened in a game I officiated. I waited until the lay-up was made and then called the technical. You actually believe that was wrong? With 30+ years officiating I could give you many examples such as this. I stand by my statement that the next time an official would give a team the basket and free throws in you original situation would be the first time it has happened.

 

Wow, and we wonder why officials have such an uphill battle to gaining respect. Admitting to being an official that wouldn't apply a rule correctly certainly gives credence to the publics perception.

Wow, and we wonder why officials have such an uphill battle to gaining respect. Admitting to being an official that wouldn't apply a rule correctly certainly gives credence to the publics perception.

 

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. Coaches are always wanting consistancy from game to game then find officials who won't apply the rules as they are specifically written, cause all officials (not just in basketball) to lose credibility when they need it most.