Quote the rule?

Better yet here is Basketball Fundamental #16 says:

The official's whistle seldom causes the ball to become dead (it is already dead).

I will admit something when I see a rule you are referencing and if it does not fit the situation. They change the rules on lag time and nothing says the whistle is the only measure of when the clock stops.

Peace

Timing Mistakes
 

Rule 5-10-1 says:

Peace

What? As to whether I heard a whistle? No. However that also isn't what stops the clock.

How else is it supposed to stop?

You might want to check the actual rule:


In this case, there was no rule justification for putting 1 second on the clock. No official signaled anything at that point.

I wasn't listening for a whistle. I was looking at all 3 officials and trying to find when any of them reacted to a timeout request.

If I'm the old T, new L, I'm looking in the direction of that coach the second the ball enters the net. Just doesn't seem to be a whole lot of awareness of the situation here.

I assume you mean looking at this with the benefit of hindsight? Sure when we slow it down we can say that the official didn't react until 0.3, but considering that the ball was through the hoop at about 1.5 seconds, I can see putting anywhere up to 1.0 seconds back on the clock, assuming the coach was immediately calling for it. The official could've easily had definite knowledge that there was 1.0 seconds remaining when he acknowledged the signal, even if his hand came up late. There is a human error factor here with the official's timing as well, and without seeing instant replay, I can understand the thinking that he saw the request, saw 1.0 second, and went with that.

For the record, I don't subscribe to Nevada's thinking that the whistle defines the timeout. I have put time back before and I will again.

I'm just saying that what stood out to me was how long it took *any* of the officials to react here. To me, just a piece of the puzzle.

Can't see any reason why the shot was waved off, either. 1.0 seconds is more than enough time to make a quick move and get a shot off.

This makes sense to me. I have been in that situation before when I've looked at the clock immediately catch the time and hear the timeout request, then react. I go with the time I saw when I heard the request. Everything they did made sense except waving off the shot.

If you have decided that you are granting the timeout, the whistle is only apart of that equation. And if you know that you are granting the timeout and your whistle is practically simultaneous with the timeout, then IMO you put time on the clock if you see that time was continuously running. The clock ran out in this case, so you should put time on the clock.

Also I see nothing that tells me when or who actually gave the signal or blew the whistle. But when the ball went through the hoop, it was around 1 second.

And I am still waiting for the position that you cannot put time on the clock when you recognize the timeout. All the interpretations suggest is you have definite knowledge when taking or putting time on the clock.

Peace

Why is the new L standing under the basket? There is no reason for him to be there. All the players are on the other side of the division line, and he can't provide any useful information in the position he takes under the basket.

As have I. I'm not going to penalize the team for me being slow to react.

Agree on both. It seems they were not paying attention....and the shot was away in time.

Camron set out earlier 5-8-1. Clock stops on the OFFICIAL'S SIGNAL. That is when the official's arm goes up. As a practical matter, the whistle comes at the same time as the arm goes up. The rule does not say that the clock stops when the coach signals the timeout.

Also, 5-10-1 says. Referee can correct OBVIOUS mistake by the TIMER to start or stop clock when he has definite knowledge. If you raise your arm/blow whistle and see clock continue to run then the TIMER has made an obvious mistake. He did not stop the clock on the official's signal. We can put the time we saw on the clock when we "signaled."

The TIMER is not making a MISTAKE, (and certainly not an obvious mistake) if he doesn't stop the clock on the coach's timeout request. As some others have said, if for some reason I go brain dead and delay signaling, I might very well put some time on the clock. However, if coach calls timeout, I determine there is player control and raise my arm the way I'm supposed to and clock stops, I will not put time back on the clock.

I call timeouts in the first half and fouls etc. The clock stops on my signal. That's the rule. It doesn't stop the exact moment the foul occurs or when the coach signals timeout. We don't put time back on clock in all of those situations and shouldn't at the end of the game either. Imo

I do not believe a single person has said anything about the request is the only reason the clock should stop. We get that the signal matters, but that signal often is not the exact moment the clock stops. And when seconds are of the essence, I am giving them everything they earned. So if they make the request with time on the clock and I am a little slow (and I will be in a timeout situation) they are getting what I noticed the very moment I blow the whistle and signal. And unless you have any evidence that in practice this is not how it is done, I would certainly like to see the reference. We do a lot of things that are not clearly spelled out or even has some best practice kind of approach. And in this case the clock ran completely out, if I am granting a timeout I am not saying my signal was too late and the game is over.

Peace

That struck me as well. All of them looked a bit shocked that the home HC would want a TO. Makes you wonder whether they got together to chat about what might happen before the visiting team's last shot took place.

The timer didn't make a mistake. I'm still putting time back. I look at the clock when a request is made -- that's how much time I'm giving them. If I'm a bit slow in blowing my whistle, I'm not penalizing the team for that.

You and Nevada can live on your island on this one.