Full Courter Waved Off

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I watched the video without sound. Can you hear a whistle in it? Did you pause it right after that?
I don't want posters to be confused by the college rule of the clock stopping when the ball clears the net. That is not the appropriate stopping point in NFHS games.

I cannot hear much sound from the highlight at all. The sound is muted big time as many highlights are done. Not sure what difference it makes, it is when the timeout is granted, not necessarily when the whistle blows.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I cannot hear much sound from the highlight at all. The sound is muted big time as many highlights are done. Not sure what difference it makes, it is when the timeout is granted, not necessarily when the whistle blows.

Wrong by rule!
Of course, you'll never admit it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Wrong by rule!
Of course, you'll never admit it.

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

[JRutledge]

Rule 5-10-1 says:

If the referee determines that the clock malfunctioned or was not started/stopped properly, or if the clock did not run, an official's count or other official information may be used to make a correction.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Nothing says the whistle is the only measure of when the clock stops.

How else is it supposed to stop?

You might want to check the actual rule:

Rule 5, SECTION 8 TIME-OUT, STOPPING PLAY
Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official:
ART. 1 . . . Signals:
a. A foul.
b. A held ball.
c. A violation.
d. A time-out.

ART. 3 . . . Grants and signals a player’s/head coach’s oral or visual request for a time-out, such request being granted only when:

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

[Rich]

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.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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

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.

[Rich]

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

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.

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

Originally Posted by Rich

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.

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

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Rich

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.

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.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by frezer11

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.

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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

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

[jpgc99]

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.