Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Camron,
If you would kindly post the text to which you are referring, I will happily review it. However, without seeing it I believe that it is likely referring to giving some reasonable leeway to the timer to start or stop that clock for natural human reaction, and not being overly picky and constantly adjusting the game clock. I seriously doubt that the advice you mention is intended to apply to a situation such as this in which the clock was stopped, the officials have definite knowledge of what the time was, and although the clock should not have started, it mistakenly did.
For example, do you believe that it would be incorrect to restore the time if a throw-in went the length of the court untouched and OOB, but the timer mistakenly started the clock when the ball bounced on the court and six seconds came off in the middle of the 2nd quarter? 
I certainly hope not. |
In correct? No. It would never be
incorrect to fix the time....just potentially unnecessary and not required.
Six seconds, however, probably will fix it....but if it was 1 or 2, probably not.
Note that EVERY case play from the casebook (there are 5 of them) all have just seconds remaining in the 4th quarter.
Also look at the NFHS Comments on the rule changes...
LAG TIME ELIMINATED (5-10-1):
This change eliminates the need for lag time or reaction time on the part of the clock operator. The referee may put the exact time observed by an official back on the game clock. The committee felt that with new clock technology and the ability to observe tenths of a second, when an official has definite knowledge relative to the time involved, he/she should have the ability to put the correct time on the game clock.
Note that the comments refer to the times when the clock shows 10ths as the reason for making the change....implying that it was only the closing seconds that are an issue. There is nothing new for any part of the game before 1:00 remaining. The clocks are unchanged. Note also that the rule and comments use the word "may", not "shall".