Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Dan_ref
|
The official signalled the clock to be properly started. The timer, in error, did not start the clock properly. Under the rules we are authorized to correct such timing errors. Therefore, according to the rule, the sub can re-enter. QED.
|
Exactly what rule are you talking about, Dan? 
There is no rule that I know of that will allow you to correct any timing error unless you know exactly how much time to put on or take off the clock. You need precise information to make any timing correction, as per R5-10. You don't have that precise info in this case, and you would have to guess. There is no rule that allows you to guess that I know of. The only thing that you have to work with in this sitch, rules-wise, is the fact that the clock never started. And if it never started, the sub doesn't meet the requirements of R3-3-4 and can't enter. QED.
|
By that argument, we can NEVER reset the clock (unless you have a portable built-in cesium clock in your brain). It's not humanly possible to know "exactly" how much time should be taken off...+/- a few picoseconds.
|
Camron, if you know of a rule that allows the referee to adjust the game clock without knowing
exactly how much time to add or take off it, then would you please cite it for us?
I'm not arguing. I'm telling you what the rules as I know them state. If you know of a rule that states something different, please enlighten me. [/B][/QUOTE]
My point was no count an official ever has is exact. It's not humanly possible. So, using "exact time" as a criteria for whether you can take time off the clock is in contradiction with reality and also with the case book. You'd never be able to adjust the clock when it fails to start.
Definite knowledge does not equal exact or precise or accurate knowledge. They are all different.
We have rules/cases (don't have my books handy) which say an official count stands even if it is not accurate (official counts too slow or too fast).
The officials count is precise if the official counts the same every time...accurate or not. This has no bearing on the ruling...just that precision/consistency is better than occassional accuracy in these situations.
The rule talks about definte knowledge. Such knowledge may not be accurate or precise but is all we are required to have. If we have knowable information that can be used to come up with some number, we can use it, even if it is not the entire elapsed time.
Example: A1 receives ball in the backcourt from a throwin. A1 takes 7 "counts" to dribble across the division line where he stands unguarded for some unknown amount of time. Eventually, B1 comes out to guard A1 and the official starts a count. After reaching a count of 4, B1 knocks the ball away and OOB. At that time, it is discovered that the clock never started.
It is not known how much time, exactly, has transpired or even if the official's counts were accurate or precise. We don't have exact, precise, or accurate information but we do have definite information. The official counted to 7 and 4. We know that for sure. 11 seconds can and should be taken off the clock. The time that counts were in progress may have only been 8 seconds or 16 seconds in reality, but that doesn't matter, we still take off 11...not accurate, exact, or precise, but definite. We can't just guess, as you state, about the unguarded time. It simply becomes free time.
Now, on the issue of the substitution, if the clock should have been running, the sub can return. The intent of the rule is statisfied...whether you actually adjust the clock or not. As I think I said earlier, the "properly started" part exists to prevent a home scorer from "accidentally" starting the clock so they can get a sub in. By the same reasoning, a home scorer shouldn't be able to "accidentially" not start the clock in order to keep a visiting sub out.
[Edited by Camron Rust on Feb 15th, 2005 at 04:02 AM]