Quote:
|
Originally Posted by just another ref
The difficult part is whether it truly should stop and start or should not start at all. If the official signals for the clock to start, then quickly realizes that the initial touch was a violation and blows the whistle, I agree that whatever small amount of time runs off is something we might have to live with as the rule is written now. But, what if the official never signals the start, and the clock starts anyway. Picture an end of game situation. .5 is on the clock. The throw-in is kicked and the buzzer sounds. The official never chopped the clock, but kept his hand up and whistled the violation. We have definite knowledge that no time elapsed between the touch the kick, as they were one and the same. So, we should put the .5 back on the clock and do it again, should we not?
|
First, there's nothing in that post that proves there's any contradiction in the rules.
Second, the official erred. The rule requires the clock must start and stop on this play. So you're in error that no time should elapse. Time should lapse between the start and stop. The fact that an illegal act occurs means nothing form a timing standpoint.
Finally, if the timer starts/stops the clock by rule, then he has not erred. it makes no difference whether the official signals or not.
For the record, I think the rule should say the clock starts on a legal touch. But it doesn't, so why worry about it?