Rhode Island State Final
 

Good job by the crew to stay focused to the buzzer!

Rhode Island high school basketball team loses state title after premature celebration - High school basketball - Boston.com

Thanks for the embed assist! :)

Embedding is your friend
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/I87iSe1kGps" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

I think putting 1.0 seconds on the clock was a bit generous.

Why is the trail standing inbounds on the throw-ins? I can't see any advantage to doing so, and a whole host of reasons why it could be problematic.

Man...what a way to end a game.

State Final though? Number of fans in the stands looked like a normal Friday night here in Indiana!

We'll draw an average of about 5500 people over 4 classes at the finals held at Bankers Life Fieldhouse.

Back in 1990 when we were one class, a kid named Damon Bailey drew 40K+ at the then, Hoosier Dome for state final. I think that is still a national record.

yup

From what I can see on the clock in the background I tend to agree. However, isn't a timeout technically granted when acknowledged by the official and not when he hits the whistle? That may be why the put a full second back on the clock.

He didn't even catch the ball until there's 0.7 seconds left. The coach does immediately call time -- on first watching I had 0.5 seconds as an estimate and I'm happy with that -- still enough time for the winning play. But 1 second was too much.

They should use a monitor in that situation everywhere if it's available.

Well, since the release at the end was at 0.7 (meaning 0.3 ran off) then it is a moot point :D

Agree.

The player first made contact with the ball at 1.0. Control, for all practical purposes, doesn't begin until some point after that. The coach signaled timeout at 0.6. The player turned towards an official at that same time....presumably saying timeout while doing so. At most, I've got 0.6 on the clock given that it takes some amount of time to control the ball before a timeout can be granted.

But, we have video to review it, they didn't. Still, I don't think I could have come up with 1.0 if I were there.

But, as also noted, 0.6 would have still been enough for that shot to have counted.

My first thought was that that earliest the timeout could have come was with 0.5 to 0.6 seconds remaining. After reading Rich's comment, I could possibly agree to 0.7 seconds, but timing the request and granting of the timeout to precisely coincide with calling at the exact moment the player gains possession is unlikely at best. That said, the ball was easily off of the shooter's hand in 0.3 to 0.2 seconds (I think the clock may have started a little slow), so the basket would have been good either way.

I am curious if anyone else noticed that the LED lights on the backboard appear to light up with 0.1 second remaining during the portion of the video where the timeout is called and the clock continues. It was a little blurry, but while trying to pause the video frame-by-frame to see how much time should have been put on the clock, I thought I saw 0.1 on the clock with the light on. Usually it seems like you'll get 0.0 without the light or horn, but never time left with a horn/light.

Ignore this...I went back and looked at it 3 more times and realized that it was 0.0 on the clock.

We're talking about Rhode Island here, whose size is barely larger than the average county.

Which begs the question, how in the world do they have 3 classes?

Tell me about it. I officiated there for one season. Each division has a very small number of teams. Their state brackets are smaller than some conference tourneys. I think to some extent it's to make the state seem more prominent than it really is. Heck, RIIL even sponsors a JV state tourney.

But...in their defense, without divisions you'd have Providence power schools routinely beating up on places like Exeter and some of the small fishing towns on the coast.

BTW, those state games are the only times you'll see 3p crews in RI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Two questions:
1. How did they come up with 1.0 for the clock? There is no way any official saw that time on the clock.

2. Did the same crew work both the D3 and D2 games? The white-haired guy looks the same.

I understand that...just seems funny cause even our Class A (small schools) get more than that in attendance.

In Texas, our Class A high schools have an student population of 104 or less (they play 6-man football) and in the playoffs there will be crowds as large as the one in the video.

So this has turned into a thread about whose (crowd) is bigger?

Let me get my ruler.

Why not? Seems the consensus is that 1 second was too much time to put back on the clock but that is doesn't matter as the shot got off before the time would have expired anyway.

So...let's move on to other things seen in the video. :p

Maybe not, but it seems like they were close.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/o5iiUlaDoM4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

No way a time-out request was recognized at 1.0.

I actually agree but he possessed the ball about that time and I can live with that time when that is what was on the clock. Even if they put .8 on the clock, that would have been OK with me as well and still would have been enough time to execute that shot at the end. It is not an exact science anyway.

Peace

I actually agree but he possessed the ball about that time and I can live with that time when that is what was on the clock. Even if they put .8 on the clock, that would have been OK with me as well and still would have been enough time to execute that shot at the end. It is not an exact science anyway.

Peace

I've heard some argue that the amount of time put back on (1.0) is a bit irrelevant since the shot took way less than that. Let me offer that there is a huge difference in this case in 1 second and say .5, and that is what it forces the defense to be ready for. With one second a shooter would have time to come off a screen take a pass at the arc, square and release a 3 pointer, or they could run any number of plays to any spot in the front court scoring area. With less time, a catch and quick put back might be the only option, and thus could be better defended than what happened here, where the initial screener back cut for the lob. If I'm the defensive coach, (after scraping myself and players off the pile and realizing you had NOT won) I'd be arguing all I could for something under 1.0, so I would have less options to defend. As someone else said, we don't have luxury of review here.

I also feel bad for the kid who passed the ball BACKWARDS after getting the (what should have been) the gw steal..WOW

I agree but they put on .8 or .7 and they could have gotten off a shot theoretically. And if you did not notice the clock did not even start exactly the time the ball touched the shooter's hand. So there is a lot of give and take in the time in these situations. Kind of like the game out west that made headlines about how a stop watch was used.

Peace

Yep, I was just making a point the defense could look for less options. Seen this play several times over the years, where on a throw in with a short clock, the coach tells us he's throwing to half court and calling an immediate time out. If the clock read 3.0 seconds prior to the throw in, what's the least amount of time that can go off on a catch and an almost simultaneous TO call? And, without a doubt, the clock operator is not waiting for a whistle..he/she is hearing the HC yelling TIME OUT, probably before ball is even touched.
What's next, a rule stating that when this play happens, a definite amount is taken off? .2 .3? Sometimes we are at not only at the mercy of slow or happy trigger fingers, but the actual mechanical capabilities of the scoreboard controlling device.

I disagree with this premise, and it clearly did not happen in this game. The clock expired and officials put time back on the clock. This is evidence the operator did the right thing and waited for the whistle.

It is not the clock operators job to stop the clock when a coach yells timeout. The clock operator should respond only to the officials.

Exactly. The player wasn't even touching the ball yet when the clock rolled to 1.0.....but he was touching it by the time it hit 0.9. And that was merely the touch, not control. 0.6 or 0.7 at most.

And BY RULE the whistle stops the clock, not the official thinking that he is granting a time-out request. There is no provision for restoring time which ticks away prior to the sounding of a whistle.

I think we've established you're the only one here who interprets the rule that strictly.

My big problem here is its obvious the crew guessed a second and put that on the clock.

I agree.

Pretty much.

Peace

Oh please. There are probably more officials who would say that it's the whistle.

Plus there are all of the timers working NFHS games. When do you expect the timer to stop the clock? When he reads the official's mind?

The OBVIOUS answer is that the whistle is the point at which the clock should stop. No one can contest that.

This thread will be getting closed soon....wish I could do it !!!!!☺☺☺☺☺☺