Quote:
Originally posted by TriggerMN
Let's say a clock goes from 2.0 seconds to 1.9 seconds. We can see that. However, if said clock does not have tenths visible, the "full second" part of the clock will still say "1" at 1.9 seconds. Same situation here. The "tenths" digit will read "0" when there are still nine one-hundreths of a second remaining. Now, I think there's either 24 or 36 frames per second on film. When you slow it down frame-by-frame, this means there will be 3 or 4 frames AFTER the game clock reads zero, but BEFORE the red light comes on.
It took a long time, but they flat out nailed it.
|
Maybe we need to go to one-hundreths of a second on our shot clocks from now on!!
Although I understand the reasoning behind letting the officials look at the replay tape just to make sure they "get it right" at end-of-game situations, I don't have to like the fact that the NCAA is attempting to take out the human element in it --> that we, as officials, can & do fail at times no matter how good we are.
As the official who is responsible for the clock on a last second call, I can simply think to myself, "It doesn't matter what I call because I can just go to the bench to make sure I'm right."
What is down the road?? Will the NCAA turn to some form of optical over-court eye to make sure every single call is correct? Perhaps some form of eye will be installed as an experiment to call the whole game? I don't even want to think about it! Each & every official is different. We may do some of the same things, and see some/many of the things the same way, but each official has his/her own eye as to what should or should not be called on a court. For me, I
never want to take officials like Welmer, Higgins, Donato, et al, off the court. Keep the human factor there!! Live or die by human judgment in these situations. If the official gets it right, then great! If the official doesn't, accept it as part of being human!
I, personally, could live with that. Too bad money-hungry organizations can't!