Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rainmaker
What's preposterous is this much arguing about two tenths of a second. Two tenths. Not two seconds. I don't know what the threshold is, but it's sure greater than two tenths of a second. In the OP the time told the refs AFTER the shots were taken that she had seen two tenths. I'm doubting that. And the game is over. No rules basis to do anything else.
|
What if it was .3, .4, .5, .6....What's the number we should use to make the determination? I think thats the argument. You say that you know that its greater then .2 and I would have to agree, but how do we know?
The book gives us a definite time to use on throw-in's with .3 or less to make a determination if it has to be tapped or if it can be caught. So if were not to be able to add time then why not give a definite time to use to determine if there is a mistake?
The book doesn't no longer give us a benchmark time to use to distinguish if there was a timing error. Since its no longer there then observed time can be put back on by rule since the official would have to determine that it was a timing error.
What if while the clock was running the HC calls a T/O, you blow your whistle while looking @ the clock, and notice @ your whistle there was 1 second but it stopped @ .2,.3, .4, or.5.. Are you going to adjust the time? What if the coach sees that more time runs off after your whistle?
Like I said way down the line that I think an argument could be made the the book would support either ruling on the OP play.