Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Dexter
But it's still a legitimate case play! If Congress wanted to change a law, but forgets to actually propose an ammendment to a bill, you don't just say "well, a few other laws have changed, so this one has, too."
Second, I believe that the plays have nothing to do with lag time. If they did, then there would be two or three parts to each situation - one where the whistle blew with more than 1.0 second on the clock, one where the whistle blew with 0.9 or less on the clock, and one where the ref blew the whistle then the ref looked up at the clock.
|
Read my post above (#111). Due to the logic given in the case play, I've flipped sides on this. If we don't have definite knowledge of how much time to put back on the clock, then we can't put any back on. By rule, time has expired. When did it expire? Just before the shot was released.
I agree with JR that by rule, you can't count the hoop unless you are able to legally put time back on the clock. If one official looks up at the clock at the whistle and sees time, then we can put the time on and score the hoop; because time hasn't actually expired.
Adam