View Single Post
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 04, 2004, 12:09pm
Back In The Saddle Back In The Saddle is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Shot v. tap

Where is our physicist in residence when you need him? JugglingReferee, you claim that the referee cannot have definite knowledge that the tap took less than 0.3 seconds. 0.3 seconds is the empirically determined minimum time it takes to catch and shoot.

A tap, on the other hand, is "the contacting of the ball with any part of the player's hand(s) in an attempt to direct the ball into his/her basket." In other words, you've got a ball in the air and you are striking it to redirect it. Assuming the player does not do a one-handed catch and release (which can be done in 0.3 seconds), you've got to consider the tap to be pretty much instantaneous. At the very least you cannot logically consider that it takes 0.3 seconds or longer.

NV asserts that counting the goal is within the spirit of the rule that allows the referee to "correct obvious timing errors." I agree with him. I can't find it at the moment, but as I recall the statement about an official's count being definite knowledge is not meant to indicate that it's the only way an official can have definite knowledge.

For example, if the two scorekeepers disagree on how many fouls a player has, they are allowed to correct this error by resorting to memory or logic to acheive "definite knowledge." It's not an exact analog, but does demonstrate that the rules writers intended the officials to use all knowledge at their disposal to correct an error.

In every case I can find, points scored during an error or disagreement by an official (correctable error situation, timer/scorer disagree, disqualified player allowed to continue playing), the basket stands.

Case 2.13 is particualarly telling in how the rules committee would think about this. If the signal cannot be heard, and the scorer and timer disagree, the referee will make the final ruling. Unless the referee has definite knowledge to the contrary, the goal shall count if it was successful.

In this case, we have an obvious timing error occurred. The referee is empowered to correct an obvious timing error. By emperical study it is definitely possible to catch and release a try in 0.3 seconds. A tap can definitely be accomplished in much less time since it involves only striking a ball already in the air. The rules committee is definitely in favor of counting the goal when in doubt.

One last thought. What does it mean to correct a timing mistake? It means to make it right, to fix it. Different situations may very well require different actions to correct. Whatever definition you apply, taking away a one-in-a-hundred basket for some mytical do-over is not correcting the mistake. It is making another one.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote