Bonus not double bonus

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Who said the clock was chopped?

Originally Posted by OKREF

The clock wouldn't have been chopped in this play. The officials thought it was 2 shots. The clock was improperly started, which is why I could see putting the time back on the clock.

This is clearly my point of view. If we never directed them to start the clock, the clock should not have started. Just like if we were shooting 1 shots and the clock started immediately after the basket was made, we would not say, "Well the clock was started, we cannot adjust the clock."

The issue to me seems to be when the mistake was recognized as much as anything. If the mistake was noticed immediately, I am putting time back to where it was.

Peace

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is clearly my point of view. If we never directed them to start the clock, the clock should not have started. Just like if we were shooting 1 shots and the clock started immediately after the basket was made, we would not say, "Well the clock was started, we cannot adjust the clock."

The issue to me seems to be when the mistake was recognized as much as anything. If the mistake was noticed immediately, I am putting time back to where it was.

Peace

Well what if time was chopped though? Say the Lead incorrectly said 2, but the C didn't hear him, or whatever, and still chopped correctly as though it was 1-1. In this instance, you have the same confusion, the same time coming off the clock, but it takes the incorrectly started arguement off the table.

Plus, if the C was also incorrect, then this error might not even be realized until later, making it a true correctable error.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by frezer11

Well what if time was chopped though? Say the Lead incorrectly said 2, but the C didn't hear him, or whatever, and still chopped correctly as though it was 1-1. In this instance, you have the same confusion, the same time coming off the clock, but it takes the incorrectly started arguement off the table.

Plus, if the C was also incorrect, then this error might not even be realized until later, making it a true correctable error.

Well in the OP it never stated that the clock was chopped in by an official. Again, if it was chopped in and was done so incorrectly, you correct the situation.

The problem as I see it with this entire conversation is caused because officials did not communicate to each other. Now we are splitting hairs as to what should be done by rule where the rules are not covering this situation exactly. This is why you communicate every single FT situation to make sure you are shooting the proper number, especially when you are not the calling official.

It just drives me crazy sometimes that we argue over a rule that is not clear in all facets of the issue, but forget that things like this are very preventable.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

And just a minor quibble with the title of the thread.....


The choice isn't bonus or double bonus. In a 1+1, the first shot isn't the bonus. The 2nd shot is the bonus for making the first. Once we get to 10 fouls, there aren't two bonuses. The singular bonus become automatic instead of earned.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Who said the clock was chopped?

"Clock should never been chopped in so I would put time back." BadNewsREF post 3.

I read the original OP as the lead being the only one thinking two shots. Assumed C chops as normal. Frankly, it likely doesn't matter. The timer is authorized to start the clock on touching even if you don't chop. The timer got it right, the officials got it wrong.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

And just a minor quibble with the title of the thread.....


The choice isn't bonus or double bonus. In a 1+1, the first shot isn't the bonus. The 2nd shot is the bonus for making the first. Once we get to 10 fouls, there aren't two bonuses. The singular bonus become automatic instead of earned.

And yet, everybody here knows what we are talking about.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BigCat

"Clock should never been chopped in so I would put time back." BadNewsREF post 3.

I read the original OP as the lead being the only one thinking two shots. Assumed C chops as normal. Frankly, it likely doesn't matter. The timer is authorized to start the clock on touching even if you don't chop. The timer got it right, the officials got it wrong.

It matters in my game, b/c my whistle would have been immediate. The fact that the timer may have still start the clock would be irrelevant to me.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well in the OP it never stated that the clock was chopped in by an official. Again, if it was chopped in and was done so incorrectly, you correct the situation.


It just drives me crazy sometimes that we argue over a rule that is not clear in all facets of the issue, but forget that things like this are very preventable.

Peace

I don't think anybody has forgotten that this is preventable. Were just saying what we think the rules require in the OP.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I don't think anybody has forgotten that this is preventable. Were just saying what we think the rules require in the OP.

If you have not forgot, then prevent this from happening so you do not have to worry about what some poster on an internet site is going to say if you correct the situation the way they think you shouldn't do.

See, problem solved.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It matters in my game, b/c my whistle would have been immediate. The fact that the timer may have still start the clock would be irrelevant to me.

I'm talking about the OP. the player rebounded ball, a second or whatever went off clock and then they discovered it.

If you blow the whistle before the player ever touches it or at that same moment you can say the timer erred by starting it.

..and i don't think it would happen in your game.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you have not forgot, then prevent this from happening so you do not have to worry about what some poster on an internet site is going to say if you correct the situation the way they think you shouldn't do.

See, problem solved.

Peace

This makes absolutely no sense.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I'm talking about the OP. the player rebounded ball, a second or whatever went off clock and then they discovered it.

If you blow the whistle before the player ever touches it or at that same moment you can say the timer erred by starting it.

..and i don't think it would happen in your game.

Only 1.5 seconds ran off in the OP, that tells me the official recognized it immediately and blew his whistle. I would put time back on the clock similar to if extra time ran off after a time-out is granted.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigCat

This makes absolutely no sense.

OK, then worry about the rules as it is being discussed. Funny, never had this situation like this in my career. I do everything to make sure I am shooting the right number of shots.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

OK, then worry about the rules as it is being discussed. Funny, never had this situation like this in my career. I do everything to make sure I am shooting the right number of shots.

Peace

You post without reading. I've never had it happen to me either. The very first thing i said is that if we screw up somebody is going to get screwed. don't let it happen. concentrate, communicate. i think that is what you said. I just went into what i think the rules require if you screw it up.

I'll let others decide if I'm talking about "the rules as it is being discussed."

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Only 1.5 seconds ran off in the OP, that tells me the official recognized it immediately and blew his whistle. I would put time back on the clock similar to if extra time ran off after a time-out is granted.

if you are calling it a timing mistake than yes you can and should put time back on. If time runs off, then the official blows whistle, clock stops on whistle... i don't think the rules allow putting the time back on.

We can agree to disagree. I'm glad we can without arguing etc. thx