End of regulation, 3/10 of second left on clock, team A(visiting team) inbounding under their own basket. Upon entry pass, clock is incorrectly started BEFORE being touched and before the signal from administrating official. The inbounds pass is tapped in for 2 by A2 after the horn sounds due to the quick-triggered time-keeper.
Question: Is the play dead at the sound of the horn, time reset and play readministered(thus penalizing team A for time-keepers mistake)? or, do you allow the basket?

This is a tough one. I guess it would depend on what the officials saw. If you have definite knowledge that happen, I would get together with my partner and make a decision. I would also consider who got screwed by the clock operator. If it was the home team, I would probably not be as eager to give them the basket. If it was the visiting team, I would be more likely to count the basket redo the play over.

I think it would all depend on how bad it was. Was the ball in the air from the pass or was the buzzer going off before the ball left the hand of the shooter.

Peace

Did the horn cause the defense to stop playing? That might suggest an unfair advantage.

If all players played it out, the tap definitely would have been within the .3, so I'd count the basket.

I think the only way to handle this is, unfortunately, a do-over. Timer's error.

Edit:

What we do know is which team had the ball (for an OB throw-in). And how much time was on the clock.

Yes, a tap is pretty much instantaneous, but you still must not have your hands touching the ball when the buzzer goes. (If I have the understanding of this rule wrong, please correct me.) So, had the clock started correctly, would the shooter's hand left the ball before the buzzer went? Only God knows that. As with the ball not being released in time. Frankly, it is unfair for us to allow or disallow a goal in this case.

Ya, it does seem that the players didn't decide the game. But you still don't know if the shot was released in time. You can't award the goal becuase it may not have. You can't cancel the goal because the clock started to early.

Result: do-over.

If there's an approved ruling, I am game, but otherwise, the refs take the heat and re-administer. Then move on.

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Nov 3rd, 2004 at 03:49 PM]

If it's really a tap, then the touch is pretty much instantaneous. The clock can't start until it's touched. There were 0.3 seconds on the clock before the throw-in. That's definite knowledge in my book.

I'm counting the basket no matter which team it was.

My question now is am I right by the rules?

Can I say that the timer sounded the horn incorreclty and I ignored it?

Can I say that the officials judgement is final on whether a last second shot beat the buzzer?

Can I say I rectified a timing mistake by ignoring the buzzer and acting on definite knowledge?

How could you possibly justify a do-over on this? How could you possibly make it fair? How can you even think about taking away that play because an official screwed up? Talk about not letting the players decide the game!

I don't think so, BITS.

First of all, in order to count, the tap/try must be released before the horn. As this was released after the horn (even though the clock was started incorrectly), it's really hard to justify counting the basket.

Now, as to the time left for a tap. The 3/10ths rule does not state that a tap takes only 3/10ths of a second. Rather, it states that if there are 3/10 or less on the clock, only a tap can count. The tap must still be released before the horn.

Because the horn went off early, there is no way to tell if the ball would have left the shooter's hands before the 3/10ths had expired. As such, I think we have a timer's error. The referee has definite knowledge of how much time should remain on the clock (0:00.3), and should have the clock reset to that.

Now, the bigger question is where does the ball get put into play. While the most fair 'do-over' strategy may be to have the team inbound at the original spot, I think we have to say that the ball is dead at the spot where the horn/whistle sounded, and the ball must be inbounded closest to that spot.

Mark, that was an incredibly logical step-by-step response. Which, in itself, means it's probably not what NHSF intends. The only point I may disagree was if we were going to say it is a "do-over" and put the remaining time back on the clock, I think a case may be made to go back to the original spot.

Now, the bigger question is where does the ball get put into play. While the most fair 'do-over' strategy may be to have the team inbound at the original spot, I think we have to say <font color = red>that the ball is dead at the spot where the horn/whistle sounded, and the ball must be inbounded closest to that spot</font>. [/B][/QUOTE]Disagree. There's no rules basis that says the ball must be inbounded closest to the spot where the horn sounded. What you're proposing is only <b>part</b> of a 'do-over', not a 'do-over', and you're also penalizing the defense for the timer's error by giving the offense a more advantageous throw-in spot.

I would hate to make this a do over. You just gave the defense a great big advantage, and just took one of those things away from the offense.

I think I would have an easier time explaining that there was a timer error, the clock started too quickly, the tap came in and took less than .3 and scored.

If there was a TO here I assure you I'd be talking with the table. I think this is one where (yes using NBA mechanics) that trail starts the clock (or also signals) and it is a solid signal... If you are talking to the table to tell the table to watch the official and not start it until it is chopped.

I am a firm believer that there are no do-overs in NFHS basketball. The rules just don't provide for it.
My ruling on the play would be that the goal counts. I would say that I have definite knowledge of an obvious timing error which I can correct and that in my judgment the tapping took less than .3 of second, so the goal is good.

The heart of my argument is that the referee can "correct obvious timing errors." (2-5-5)
The book says nothing about the manner in which the referee can correct them. It does NOT say that the referee is limited to adjusting or resetting the clock. Therefore, I take a more expansive view and say that the referee can correct the timing mistake by allowing a play and a basket to count if in his judgment it would have been legal action if not for the timing error.

To really understand my argument, consider the converse situation. Near the end of a quarter the timer forgets to start the clock. Let's say there was 1.2 seconds remaining. No one has a problem disallowing a basket and ending that quarter, if in the official's judgment the scoring play took longer than the time that was remaining. I don't think that any of us would have a do-over.



[Edited by Nevadaref on Nov 4th, 2004 at 01:33 AM]

Hmmmmmm. Interesting statement.

So......

If you let the wrong player attempt a FT or allow a FT to be attempted at the wrong basket, then the rules just don't provide for a do-over if the error is caught before the first dead ball after the clock has started? Yup, no do-overs in NFHS basketball, eh?

PS- Your ruling above about allowing the tap is your <b>opinion</b>. I am a firm believer that there is no NFHS rule that will back your opinion. :D

You do not have definite knowledge that the tap took less than 0.3 seconds. Simple because of the fact that the two events occurred at different times during the universe's timeline. No definite knowledge = no definite ruling. The only definite knowledge is that there was 0.3 seconds on the clock and it was improperly started.

IMHO, this is too much of a stretch.

Many times in these circumstances you have a visible or non-visible count going. These counts are definite knowledge. If you can count in tenths of a second accurately (and prove it!), then yes, I will buy your original elements. Tenths of a second accuracy are needed because the shot can be released between 00:01.00 and 00:02.00.

For those times where there is no visible or non-visible count (FC throw-in, because there doesn't have to be a 3-, 5-, or 10-second count started), or a referee that doesn't do a visible count anyways (to provide herself with definite knowledge if needed), then if the clock is late starting and:

- the shot is missed: the defensive coach will not say "boo" for obvious reasons, and the offensive coach will not say "boo" either because with the way the play happened, they got a shot off illegally (let's say the whole thing actually took longer than 1.2s, but still before the late buzzer)

- the shot is made: the offensive coach will not say "boo" for obvious reasons, but the defensive coach will tell you that the clock started late (d@mn home timers :D), thus promoting the possibility of a shot actually taken after the buzzer should have sounded and if you're an official that notices this, and you do not correct it, you are guilty of unethical behavior. If you do not notice it, then there is nothing that can be done, because there is no definite knowledge.

In addition, if you notice the clock starts late, and the shot goes in, I think ya gotta hammer on the whistle right away and get the call right. Ya, it sucks, but do the proper thing: cancel the basket, re-align for another throw-in, and move on.

JR, there are first year officials listening. Please do not confuse them by trying to claim that a correctable error situation is the same as a do-over. In the case of letting the wrong player shoot the free throws, it ain't no stinkin' do-over. The referee is just finally doing what he should have done, which is have the offended player shoot the free throws at the correct basket.

But if you want to drag the correctable error rule into this, then you have to note that it says that all action (that would be the basket) that occurs between the time of the error and it's being corrected stands. By that logic, the tap stands. And, hey presto, they get another shot at it too!

If you read my statements again, I'm not saying that the situation being discussed is a "correctible error", or is it governed by the correctible error rule. I'm saying that the rule book does allow for "do-overs". Iow, I don't agree with Nevada's blanket statement- and I still don't agree with it.

And maybe you also could please enlighten me as to what you would call cancelling a FT and then repeating the exact SAME FT if it's not "a stinkin' do-over"?

Shot v. tap
 

Where is our physicist in residence when you need him? JugglingReferee, you claim that the referee cannot have definite knowledge that the tap took less than 0.3 seconds. 0.3 seconds is the empirically determined minimum time it takes to catch and shoot.

A tap, on the other hand, is "the contacting of the ball with any part of the player's hand(s) in an attempt to direct the ball into his/her basket." In other words, you've got a ball in the air and you are striking it to redirect it. Assuming the player does not do a one-handed catch and release (which can be done in 0.3 seconds), you've got to consider the tap to be pretty much instantaneous. At the very least you cannot logically consider that it takes 0.3 seconds or longer.

NV asserts that counting the goal is within the spirit of the rule that allows the referee to "correct obvious timing errors." I agree with him. I can't find it at the moment, but as I recall the statement about an official's count being definite knowledge is not meant to indicate that it's the only way an official can have definite knowledge.

For example, if the two scorekeepers disagree on how many fouls a player has, they are allowed to correct this error by resorting to memory or logic to acheive "definite knowledge." It's not an exact analog, but does demonstrate that the rules writers intended the officials to use all knowledge at their disposal to correct an error.

In every case I can find, points scored during an error or disagreement by an official (correctable error situation, timer/scorer disagree, disqualified player allowed to continue playing), the basket stands.

Case 2.13 is particualarly telling in how the rules committee would think about this. If the signal cannot be heard, and the scorer and timer disagree, the referee will make the final ruling. Unless the referee has definite knowledge to the contrary, the goal shall count if it was successful.

In this case, we have an obvious timing error occurred. The referee is empowered to correct an obvious timing error. By emperical study it is definitely possible to catch and release a try in 0.3 seconds. A tap can definitely be accomplished in much less time since it involves only striking a ball already in the air. The rules committee is definitely in favor of counting the goal when in doubt.

One last thought. What does it mean to correct a timing mistake? It means to make it right, to fix it. Different situations may very well require different actions to correct. Whatever definition you apply, taking away a one-in-a-hundred basket for some mytical do-over is not correcting the mistake. It is making another one.