Quote:
Originally Posted by APG
What does possession have to do with chopping the clock? You're only looking for a touch.
|
This is true, but when said touch is clearly a two-hand grab that coincides with possession, I could chop and then instantaneously put my hand back up for the TO call. But why concede time to the timer's OODA loop (observe, orient, decide, act) when you know for certain the touch, possession, and timeout call were all at the same moment?
To me, this runs the risk of ALL the time coming off the clock, and then you have to go back to the table and defend something. Whether that be the game being over or putting some arbitrary fraction of a second back on the clock is up to the crew. I'd rather avoid that situation with a more logical judgment, i.e. that the player was actively calling TO at the precise moment the throw-in ended, which in this case coincided with possession.
Again, this is a very specific case. A lot of things had to fall into place, i.e. the player clearly desiring a TO as quickly as he could get possession, and a definitive possession that coincided with the end of the throw-in. If I have definite knowledge of that, then time didn't run off the clock. Short of this, then yes, some time is most surely going to come off.
NOTE: This is my interpretation of the rule. Nothing in the rules states clearly that a minimum of 0.X seconds must come off the clock when a throw-in ends. But I understand that others will interpret this situation differently and I'm comfortable with that. This is a good case for the NFHS to clarify if they haven't already somewhere in the interp archives.