Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
Chuck,
Why the two different rulings? What is the difference between "in his/her judgment" and "has definite knowledge"?
|
The difference is to cover both the case when the official is looking at the clock when the whistle blows and also the case when the official is not looking at the clock when the whistle blows.
In the first ruling, the official is allowed to use his/her judgment about whether or not the clock ran for less than a second. If you're not looking at the clock as the whistle blows (as JR has pointed out in the other thread), you can't know
definitely how much time ran off. So even if you don't know for sure how much time came off, you can still put back the time you saw. At least, that's what it sounds like to me.
In the second ruling, the official has definite knowledge, which means that s/he was looking at the clock when the whistle sounded.
The two rulings remove the absurd distinction created by the FED's lag time provision. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
