Free throw

[JRutledge]

I am simply talking about this situation. Not talking about every situation. I am not asking table people for information to decide the game without any conversation with my partners. That is not happening. You can do that, but I will not do that in this kind of situation.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not asking table people for information to decide the game without any conversation with my partners.

My hierarchy: Me first. Not sure? My partner second. Still not sure? Table officials (timekeeper, official scorekeeper, and visiting scorekeeper). Referee decides on credibility of table officials. Still not sure? Referee makes final decision, which may be based on:

2-13-4: If table officials disagree, the goal must count and/or the foul must be penalized, unless the referee has knowledge which alters such ruling.

2-5-5: The referee must: Decide matters upon which the scorer and timer disagree and correct obvious timing errors.

[ilyazhito]

Check your local listings. For varsity games, at least in some associations, the clock operator is also an official. If that is the case, the crew can consult with him (her) the same as with each other. If any doubt still remains, the goal will count and/or the foul will be penalized, unless there is definite information that alters the ruling. With reference to the OP, if the clock operator/official knows that time remains, he will consult with the referee and put time back on the clock (if the game clock does not use 10ths, 1 second, if it does, then whatever time he (and the calling official) had when the whistle was blown or foul signaled, whichever happened first).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... when the whistle was blown or foul signaled ...

Interesting reminder. Many non-officials would believe that the foul itself stops the clock (it only makes to ball dead in many circumstances).

5-8-1-A: Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, must be stopped when an official: Signals: A foul.

Note: It is my opinion that by "signal" a foul, the NFHS means that the "signal" can be audible, a whistle sounding; and/or an actual visual "stop the clock" (fist) signal.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

With reference to the OP, if the clock operator/official knows that time remains, he will consult with the referee and put time back on the clock ...

Re-read the original post. There's no indication that an error, or a delay, occurred. Nor is there any indication that the automatic horn was turned off.

This is one of those extremely rare times in an officiating career when the clock shows all zeros, but the horn hasn't sounded. While no time shows on the scoreboard clock, more time does exist within the internal mechanism of the system. For a scoreboard that doesn't shows tenths of a second, the remaining time may be tenths of a second. For a scoreboard that shows tenths of a second, the remaining time may be hundredths of a second. Some modern consoles may show the split-second remaining time, other won't.

There is no NFHS rule that tells us to add time to the "scoreboard" clock in such circumstances. If the "scoreboard" clock can't show tenths of a second, then it can't show tenths of a second. If the "scoreboard" clock can't show hundredths of a second, then it can't show hundredths of a second. We don't "substitute" on the "scoreboard" clock a second for a tenth of a second, or a tenth of a second for an hundredth of a second. We just tell the coaches that there is a split second remaining (known, or unknown), and finish playing the period.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

My hierarchy: Me first. Not sure? My partner second. Still not sure? Table officials (timekeeper, official scorekeeper, and visiting scorekeeper). Referee decides on credibility of table officials. Still not sure? Referee makes final decision, which may be based on:

2-13-4: If table officials disagree, the goal must count and/or the foul must be penalized, unless the referee has knowledge which alters such ruling.

2-5-5: The referee must: Decide matters upon which the scorer and timer disagree and correct obvious timing errors.

Sounds wonderful on paper, but again I am not having the table people make a decision of the clock. If we have to do that, then we are not doing the right thing. They are clearly the last result and I stand by that position. I think the crew needs to know what is going on with the clock and make the proper decisions. Just the way I roll. Anyone here can default to anything they wish.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... table ... are clearly the last result ...

Unless the referee finds their information to be credible, they are not the last result (even then, it's not them, it's the referee finding them credible). The referee is the penultimate last result, and he may defer to the ultimate last result, the rulebook (the goal will count and/or the foul will be penalized).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Unless the referee finds their information to be credible, they are not the last result (even then, it's not them, it's the referee finding them credible). The referee is the penultimate last result, and he may defer to the ultimate last result, the rulebook (the goal will count and/or the foul will be penalized).

I have been doing this for awhile. I do not need your instruction on what I am going to do in these situations. You can take the information or leave it. Just telling you what I have found and what works. Not asking for approval from you or anyone on this topic. I get what you want to do and you should do that. Let us that have been doing this a long time too make the best decisions. I do not work for IAABO or the NF. I work for assignors (more than 10) in two different states and no on is caring about the things you have mentioned.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As we all know, real game situations are not the same as written exam questions ...

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You can take the information or leave it. Just telling you what I have found and what works ... assignors ...

JRutledge's posts would be a lot more understandable and worthwhile if he were to differentiate between his preferred methods (that have made him a very successful official in more than one sport); and the accepted methods of his local or state associations, as well as his assigners; and the "real" NFHS rules or interpretations (that could possibly apply to a wide range of Forum members).

We all understand the concept of "When in Rome", and of individual things that we do (often in opposition to the NFHS rules and interpretations) that make us, and our local or state colleagues, successful basketball officials.

In the case of JRutledge, one can't argue with his success. It's undeniable. Heed his advice. But as important and educational as his Forum posts are are, can be, and should be, I wish that he would stress when he posts something "NFHS different" that makes him successful, allowing Forum members to easily pick and choose among his posts for his sage career building advice.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... I wish that he would stress when he posts something "NFHS different" that makes him successful ...

No need to identify judgment calls as being "NFHS different". We all know that judgment calls are inherently subjective and are educated opinions rather than "alternative facts".