[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

I have to disagree - 2, 3, and 4 start the clock, 1 refers to giving a signal.

Art. 1 states that the clock "shall be started when the official signals time-in." If that takes precedent over 2, 3, and 4, we have two problems.

(1) A1 is awarded 2 free throws, and the C signals the clock to start when the ball is bounced to A1 before the first shot. If article 1 takes precedent (over art. 3 in this case), then the clock should run, and both the center official and the timer are correct in having the clock run (as the clock, by rule, should start when the official says it should start).

(2) The syntax of the rule also provides a problem. If article 1 has precedent, then the timer (if the official neglects) can start the clock "as per rule." If articles 2-4 only refer to the signal, then the only rule for starting the clock is article 1 - and the only way to start the clock as per rule is on the official's signal - which was never given - so the clock can't run.

The rules are there in the order of:

a) What starts the clock, which is the official's signal rule 5-9-1.

b) When that signal should occur for a jump ball, a missed FT, and a throw in, 5-9-2, 3 and 4.

a) Is the only one that has baring for a Timer's error, UNLESS the official NEGLECTS to signal time in, then and only then do 5-9-2 thru 4 come into play for the timer.

If it were the way you and MTD are suggesting, wouldn't the rules read the timer should start the clock on the action of the players? There would be no need for 5-9-1 even being there.

So unless there is some hidden rule that gives the timer the authority to ignore the official's signal, and there are 5 case plays that deal with errors coming from the Timer ignoring the official's signal to properly start or stop the clock, I'd say that rule does not exist.

This is 100% an OFFICIAL'S ERROR, because there is ZERO rules support to say otherwise.