Thu Nov 18, 2004, 04:56pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by BushRef
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
What based on B's stalling did A truely gain in this situation? A is down 5 with 7 seconds left, we have 3 possible outcomes:
1) B stalls down to 1 or 2 seconds and whistle violation, A's ball, still down 5. 1a) You ignore A's touch and keep counting to the violation and you have to whack B's coach.
2) You call the T on A for an unwarned delay, B shoots 2 gets ball at division line up 5,6, or 7 with 3 or 4 seconds left.
3) You start your count on B, blow your whistle on the touch by A and warn, B's ball up 5 with 3 or 4 seconds left with the end line to run.
1 and 1a benefit A.
2 benefits B and the penalty based on the intent, as discribed, seems harsh.
3 does not hurt either team, the only difference is B can't take the running clock down to 1 or 2 seconds. A gained a couple of seconds life, and B keeps the ball and the end line run. Seems very fair based on this situation.
|
I guess the first part of your name is the most fitting. Looks like you misread the original sitch. Team A was down 5, then scored, so now they're down 3. If you stop the clock for a warning, and A manages to steal the inbounds or get a 5 second call, all they need is a 3 to tie. By calling the warning, you have saved them some of the time they may need to get their shot off.
|
Let's get personal, the score does not change a thing.
It still comes down to an unusual situation and using common sense. Also 9.2.11 says 5 seconds or less on that throw in, this situation was at 7 seconds. I'm not so blind afterall. 
|