Act of Shooting...Foul...Horn...Release -- Score It?

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by SAK

The release of the ball and the time on the clock has nothing to do with being in the act of shooting. You can be fouled in the act of shooting and release the ball after the horn. In that case you get 2 or 3 shots but because the ball was not released before the horn the basket cannot count if it goes in. Remember to shoot the foul shots prior to ending the period.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Sometimes it does (depending on the level and the replay capabilities)

In NFHS, unless you have some kind of very accurate definite knowledge, you have to account for the reaction time of the timer (speed of sound, reaction time, etc.). That's usually about a quarter second or so. Some guys say, "put 0.3 back on." I hate that; it is supported by neither rule nor case play in NFHS.

NCAA with replay = different story. In that scenario, the only time you'd be shooting FTs with no time on the clock on this case would be if the foul occurred on an airborne shooter after the expiration of time (assuming the shooter released the try in time).

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

In NFHS, unless you have some kind of very accurate definite knowledge, you have to account for the reaction time of the timer (speed of sound, reaction time, etc.). That's usually about a quarter second or so. Some guys say, "put 0.3 back on." I hate that; it is supported by neither rule nor case play in NFHS.

NCAA with replay = different story. In that scenario, the only time you'd be shooting FTs with no time on the clock on this case would be if the foul occurred on an airborne shooter after the expiration of time (assuming the shooter released the try in time).

If an official sees a time on the clock, that time can be put back....even if it is just 0.3....and even if it is reaction time. The time it takes for the official to see the clock is the reaction time the timer is allowed.

In this case, the official should have looked at the clock to have something to put back. If the foul & whistle happened before the horn, the clock should have stopped. The shot "should" count and time "should" be put back...but the only way to do within the rules that is to look at the clock and see it before it gets to 0 or to have some mental count of the time.

And unless you're standing at the opposite side of the parking lot, the speed of sound isn't going to matter.

Also, nothing in the rules says the definite knowledge has to have any sort of accuracy.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If an official sees a time on the clock, that time can be put back....even if it is just 0.3....and even if it is reaction time. The time it takes for the official to see the clock is the reaction time the timer is allowed.

In this case, the official should have looked at the clock to have something to put back. If the foul & whistle happened before the horn, the clock should have stopped. The shot "should" count and time "should" be put back...but the only way to do within the rules that is to look at the clock and see it before it gets to 0 or to have some mental count of the time.

And unless you're standing at the opposite side of the parking lot, the speed of sound isn't going to matter.

Also, nothing in the rules says the definite knowledge has to have any sort of accuracy.

I agree with all of this in general. In fact I've applied it before. If you see it on the clock, you can put it back on. I'm not sure I would use a mental count when tenths of a second are involved. It's one thing when you have a backcourt count going and you notice the clock didn't start after a throw-in. This is a situation that requires much more precision....the kind that only visual observation of the clock can provide.

It's when I don't observe a time on the clock (in a situation where the foul is pretty much bang-bang with the horn) that I have a problem with just arbitrarily putting a set amount of time back on the clock. No rules support for that, though I know there are nonetheless some supervisors out there that direct it.

[SAK]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If an official sees a time on the clock, that time can be put back....even if it is just 0.3....and even if it is reaction time. The time it takes for the official to see the clock is the reaction time the timer is allowed.

In this case, the official should have looked at the clock to have something to put back. If the foul & whistle happened before the horn, the clock should have stopped. The shot "should" count and time "should" be put back...but the only way to do within the rules that is to look at the clock and see it before it gets to 0 or to have some mental count of the time.

And unless you're standing at the opposite side of the parking lot, the speed of sound isn't going to matter.

Also, nothing in the rules says the definite knowledge has to have any sort of accuracy.

How can you say that time should be put back on the clock and that the basket should count. The ball was not released until after time expired. The player was in the act of shooting before time expired. So now we should not care the location and status of the ball when the time expires. Lets just shoot the ball (which is still in contact with the shooter) when time expires, heck, whey don't we shoot minutes after the time has expired?

In all seriousness, I know that this is a case book play but I just cannot seem to find it right now. I will continue looking.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by SAK

How can you say that time should be put back on the clock and that the basket should count. The ball was not released until after time expired. The player was in the act of shooting before time expired. So now we should not care the location and status of the ball when the time expires. Lets just shoot the ball (which is still in contact with the shooter) when time expires, heck, whey don't we shoot minutes after the time has expired?

In all seriousness, I know that this is a case book play but I just cannot seem to find it right now. I will continue looking.

NCAA restores the time on the clock at the moment of the contact for the foul. That can be done with a courtside monitor.
For NFHS, if the whistle comes before the horn and an official sees time remaining on the clock, that time can be restored and the try counts.
The last part is what Camron is advocating.

[SAK]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

NCAA restores the time on the clock at the moment of the contact for the foul. That can be done with a courtside monitor.
For NFHS, if the whistle comes before the horn and an official sees time remaining on the clock, that time can be restored and the try counts.
The last part is what Camron is advocating.

I 100% agree with the putting the time that should be on the clock back on the clock but we can only do that if there is definite knowledge of the time. If we don't have definite knowledge we cannot do anything but shoot the free throws.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by SAK

I 100% agree with the putting the time that should be on the clock back on the clock but we can only do that if there is definite knowledge of the time. If we don't have definite knowledge we cannot do anything but shoot the free throws.

That is exactly what Camron would do. Afterall, he is an excellent official who has worked a State Championship game. He is simply saying that on this play someone should have definite knowledge and the try should count. Don't confuse that with what he would do in the absence of that.

[SAK]

@Nevada

In that case I agree with you and Cameron. Someone should know the time but it is not always the case.

If someone could help me as I am sure that there is a case book play that is just like this one, I cannot find it presently.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Also, nothing in the rules says the definite knowledge has to have any sort of accuracy.

Lost me here, example? Seems with zero accuracy there's no definite knowledge.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Dad

Lost me here, example? Seems with zero accuracy there's no definite knowledge.

Lah, me. I'll explain it to you.

If the foul happens with 0.7 on the clock and the whistle blows with 0.5, but the official doesn't look until 0.2, then 0.2 is what gets restored by rule. In this case the official is not accurate as he was slow to look either when blowing the whistle or hearing his partner's. However, he does have definite knowledge.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Lah, me. I'll explain it to you.

If the foul happens with 0.7 on the clock and the whistle blows with 0.5, but the official doesn't look until 0.2, then 0.2 is what gets restored by rule. In this case the official is not accurate as he was slow to look either when blowing the whistle or hearing his partner's. However, he does have definite knowledge.

This isn't zero accuracy. You knew some time was left on the clock. I was just curious how far Camron would take definite knowledge.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dad

This isn't zero accuracy. You knew some time was left on the clock. I was just curious how far Camron would take definite knowledge.

I have a mental count at any time when the situation matters. I look at the clock on any whistle when the situation matters (and the play allows). Between the two, I'm going to definitely have knowledge of how much time was left, even in fractions of a second, if the horn sounds after my whistle.

In my count, I might be off a couple of tenths at most but that is allowed by rule.

I KNOW that the clock ran after the whistle, I KNOW I had a count in my head. I can, by rule, use that count to restore time regardless of how accurate it is.

Anyone that has ever had much musical training (and I have) is going to have a good sense of time and reasonably accurate timing, even to subparts of a second. No reason not to use all the skills and training one has in order to do a better job.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I have a mental count at any time when the situation matters. I look at the clock on any whistle when the situation matters (and the play allows). Between the two, I'm going to definitely have knowledge of how much time was left, even in fractions of a second, if the horn sounds after my whistle.

In my count, I might be off a couple of tenths at most but that is allowed by rule.

I KNOW that the clock ran after the whistle, I KNOW I had a count in my head. I can, by rule, use that count to restore time regardless of how accurate it is.

Anyone that has ever had much musical training (and I have) is going to have a good sense of time and reasonably accurate timing, even to subparts of a second. No reason not to use all the skills and training one has in order to do a better job.

Thank you for the response!

I agree, musical training helps a lot with having a feel for timing.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dad

Lost me here, example? Seems with zero accuracy there's no definite knowledge.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Lah, me. I'll explain it to you.

If the foul happens with 0.7 on the clock and the whistle blows with 0.5, but the official doesn't look until 0.2, then 0.2 is what gets restored by rule. In this case the official is not accurate as he was slow to look either when blowing the whistle or hearing his partner's. However, he does have definite knowledge.

Another example....the clock is at 7.5 at the time of a throwin that is immediately caught inbounds while closely guarded. The clock doesn't start. The official's 5-count is in progress and gets to 5 without the clock starting. Like many official's counts, the count is slow and it was really 8 seconds. You still take 5 off the clock regardless of how accurate the official's count is.