[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle

I do not know of a rule that would negate what JR is saying about 5-10. I also do not know of a rule that supports what JR is saying about 5-10. JR and I disagree on how much latitude 5-10 gives an official to implement a common sense, obviously needed time correction.

Here's what the rule actually says:

SECTION 10 TIMER'S MISTAKES
ART. 1 . . . The referee may correct an obvious mistake by the timer to start or stop the clock properly only when he/she has definite information relative to the time involved.
ART. 2 . . . If the referee determines that the clock was not started or stopped properly, or if the clock did not run, an official's count or other official information can be used to make a correction.

You'll note that an official's count is not the only acknowledged source of official information. It is merely the only one specifically named.

Also note that it says nothing about absolute knowledge of how much time elapsed. For that you'd need a working clock and properly functioning clock operator.

But you do need to have "definite information relative to the time involved." In this case we have definite knowledge of three factors relative to the time involved:

• How much time was on the clock
• When the clock should have started
• When the horn sounded

You'd also have a pretty good idea of how much time transpired between the touch and the horn.

I'm not suggesting that we make a wild guess. I am asserting that given the circumstances it's possible to make a pretty accurate estimate. Another word for estimate is judgement. And we get paid to make judgements.

Your call.

In the real world, I don't have a problem at all with what you're proposing, BITSy. In the "Land of the Rules" however, it ain't gonna fly though. The "three known factors" that you listed above aren't relative at all. The only really relevant factor is the amount of time that exactly has to be put back on the clock. The rules say that you have to have definite information to make that decision. Iow "a pretty good idea" and "a pretty accurate estimate" just isn't good enough. Ideas and estimates don't comprise definite information. You have to know-say- whether you should take 1.1, 1.2 or 1.3 seconds off the original 4.1 seconds. You can't guess at which one of those to use. Rule 5-10 just won't let you do that. With that small amount of time left(4.1 seconds), even a difference of 0.1 of a second put back on the clock could be the difference as to whether a shot should be counted or not.

I can make the idea of taking some estimated time off the clock and then having a throw-in at center work. Most coaches are reasonable, and I'm sure I could talk them into that. However, if anybody ever protested, I don't think that I could also talk a rules committee hearing that protest into the same thing. When they ask me for justification from a rules' standpoint for what I've done, I really don't know what I can tell them. And if I ever gave a team a repeat throw-in 42 feet up the court without taking any time at all off the clock, as Mark suggested, well.....I wouldn't even wanna start thinking of how to explain that one.