Inboudn play with 2.8 seconds left

[cmathews]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

I read this differently - 5.10.1(C) says that you cannot correct the OFFICIAL based on the CLOCK (i.e., call a 10 second violation, give the ball to B, and reset the clock to 2 seconds).

In this case, the official was not following prescribed mechanics - where in the rule book, case book, or official's manual does it say to signal the clock to start before the throw-in is legally touched inbounds? (On an inbounds play, of course.)

Mark that is the point, the official erred, not the timer, the timer is supposed to start the clock when signalled to..if you can find somewhere that it says the timer will start the clock when properly signalled by the official then I will change my stance...otherwise this is an officials error and it sucks....but I would still invoke 2-3 give the ball to the offended team at the original spot and reset the clock to the original time...

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

I have to disagree - 2, 3, and 4 start the clock, 1 refers to giving a signal.

Art. 1 states that the clock "shall be started when the official signals time-in." If that takes precedent over 2, 3, and 4, we have two problems.

(1) A1 is awarded 2 free throws, and the C signals the clock to start when the ball is bounced to A1 before the first shot. If article 1 takes precedent (over art. 3 in this case), then the clock should run, and both the center official and the timer are correct in having the clock run (as the clock, by rule, should start when the official says it should start).

(2) The syntax of the rule also provides a problem. If article 1 has precedent, then the timer (if the official neglects) can start the clock "as per rule." If articles 2-4 only refer to the signal, then the only rule for starting the clock is article 1 - and the only way to start the clock as per rule is on the official's signal - which was never given - so the clock can't run.

The rules are there in the order of:

a) What starts the clock, which is the official's signal rule 5-9-1.

b) When that signal should occur for a jump ball, a missed FT, and a throw in, 5-9-2, 3 and 4.

a) Is the only one that has baring for a Timer's error, UNLESS the official NEGLECTS to signal time in, then and only then do 5-9-2 thru 4 come into play for the timer.

If it were the way you and MTD are suggesting, wouldn't the rules read the timer should start the clock on the action of the players? There would be no need for 5-9-1 even being there.

So unless there is some hidden rule that gives the timer the authority to ignore the official's signal, and there are 5 case plays that deal with errors coming from the Timer ignoring the official's signal to properly start or stop the clock, I'd say that rule does not exist.

This is 100% an OFFICIAL'S ERROR, because there is ZERO rules support to say otherwise.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by cmathews

Mark that is the point, the official erred, not the timer, the timer is supposed to start the clock when signalled to..if you can find somewhere that it says the timer will start the clock when properly signalled by the official then I will change my stance...otherwise this is an officials error and it sucks....but I would still invoke 2-3 give the ball to the offended team at the original spot and reset the clock to the original time...

100% correct, and luckily in Arizona, we have a rules interpreter who will back that ruling, even though by rule the game is over 5.10.1.C.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Our older son was competing in the first H.S. swim meet of his career and while I was watching the meet before he was to swim, I thought of a play that will show that NFHS R5-S9-A4 takes precedence over R5-S9-A1.

B1 is Team B’s best three-point field goal shooter, but he is not one of the five best defensive players on Team B. Team B scores a field goal to cut Team A’s lead to one point. Team A inbounds the ball and B2 immediately commits a common foul against A1. Team A is in the double bonus. A1’s first free throw attempt is successful. B6, a much better defensive player than B1, replaces B1 after A1’s first free throw attempt. Coach B has B1 remain at the Scorer’s/Timer’s Table. Coach B wants B1 to replace B6 at the first opportunity to re-enter the game. A2 commits a free throw violation during A1’s second free throw attempt. Team B is awarded a designated throw-in on the end line in its backcourt because of A2 free throw violation. B2 will attempt the throw-in for Team B. Team A has 7’-00” tall A3 guard B2. The Trail official places the ball at B2’s disposal and keeps one arm raised with an open hand to signify that the clock shall remain stopped. B2 releases the ball in an attempt to pass the ball over A3. A3 blocks B2’s pass back against the wall behind B2. The ball goes from A3’s hands to the wall so quickly that the Trail official cannot do anything but to sound his whistle to stop play because of the out-of-bounds violation by A3; the Trail’s raised hand is never lowered.

From this point, the play has four different options. The game clock’s visible display can be shown in either (1) whole seconds (GC-1), or (2) tenths of a second (GC-2). The game clock controller unit has a LCD that shows the Timer how much time is on the game clock; the LCD shows the time in tenths of a second no matter which of the two types of visible displays are used.

When the game clock was stopped for B2’s common foul, the game clock with the visible display in whole seconds shows 11 seconds, and the game clock with the visible display in tenths of a second shows 11.9 seconds. The LCD display on both controllers show 00:11.9 second. We now have the four plays below:


After the Trail sounds his whistle:

Play A-1: The visible display of GC-1 shows 11 seconds and the LCD shows 11.9 seconds.

Play A-2: The visible display of GC-2 shows 11.9 seconds and the LCD shows 11.9 seconds.

Play B-1: The visible display of GC-1 shows 11 seconds and the LCD shows 11.1 seconds.

Play B-2: The visible display of GC-2 shows 11.1 seconds and the LCD shows 11.1 seconds.

Can B1 re-enter the game and replace B6 before Team B attempts its throw-in due to A3’s out-of-bounds violation?

blindzebra:

I have reposted my play above in order to discuss your response of Dec 18/Sat., 2004 10:28pm which was:

"What you described is an official NEGLECTING to signal time in on a throw in touched on the floor, and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the play in question. This play falls under a Timer's error, because of the little, "The timer is AUTHORIZED to start the clock per rule if the official NEGLECTS to signal," in 5-9-1.

Once again, 5-9-1 is the rule that STARTS the clock. 5-9-2, 3 and 4 are when that SIGNAL is to be given.

Yes B1 may re-enter, and I'd leave the clock as it is, because the only options, by rule, is to take a full second off the clock for lag time, or go back to the last know time."


You are forgetting some of the fundamentals of basketball. Here are some examples: (1) The Scorer’s signal does not cause a live ball to become dead. (2) The official’s whistle does not always cause a live ball to become dead. And (3) The Timer’s signal does not always cause a live ball to become dead. It is the same for a live ball becoming dead. The vast majority of the time it is a player’s actions cause a live ball to become dead.

At one time there were only two ways that an official could cause a dead ball to become live: (1) The official released the ball for a jump ball. And (2) the official placed the ball at the disposal of a free throw shooter. During throw-ins the ball did not change from a dead ball to a live ball until the throw-in was touched a player or was touched by a player on the court.

What am I saying? It is actions by the players, for the most part, that cause a live ball to become dead. This same logic says that it is players’ actions that dictate when the game clock starts. It is the actions of the players that cause the game clock to start on a throw-in, not the actions of the official and/or Timer that causes the game clock to start. And more importantly, the failure of an official and/or Timer to do or not to do something does negate the fact that it is players’ actions that causes the clock to start. What does this mean? It means that if the official signals time in and/or the Timer starts the clock before the players’ actions cause the game clock to start, the players’ actions dictate what happens next. The players’ actions cannot be negated and the time on the game clock is not correct. What to do? What to do? Correct the game clock and resume play from the point of interruption.


bz, lets look your answer to the four plays that I posted. You stated that B1 can replace B6 in all four plays. You have stated that the game official made a mistake in not signaling time in, and mistakes by the game officials (not to be confused with correctable errors) cannot be corrected.


In Plays A-1 and A-2, the Timer did not start the game clock because the game official did not signal time in. Was the Timer correct in not starting the game clock because the game official did not signal time in, or did the Timer make a mistake in not starting the game clock as authorized by R5-S9-A1? Which is it? If the Timer was correct in not starting the game clock then B1 cannot re-enter the game and replace B6. If the Timer did start the game clock as authorized by R5-S9-A1, then B1 can re-enter the game to replace B6, but how can the game clock be adjusted to reflect the correct time, if the game officials do not have definite knowledge of how much time should actually be on the game clock?


In Plays B-1 and B-2, was the Timer incorrect in starting the game clock because the game official was incorrect in not signaling time in or was the Timer correct in starting the game clock as authorized in R5-S9-A1? Which is it? If the time was incorrect in starting the game clock, then B1 cannot re-enter the game to replace B6, and does that mean that the game clock must be reset to show no elapsed time
? If the Timer was correct in starting the game clock then B1 can re-enter the game to replace B6 and we resume play with the time on the game clock as the correct time.


We have two sets of plays that are identical for all intents and purposes, yet by using your logic we can have conflicting interpretations. What to do? What to do?


How do we solve this conundrum? Easy use logic and apply the fundamentals of the game. The players’ actions caused the game clock to start, whether or not time was actually runoff the game clock. Therefore B1 can re-enter the game for B6. The time on the game clock in all four plays remain as is when play was stopped for A3’s out-of-bounds violation. The type of action in all four plays happen so very quickly, that it is equally possible for the Timer to start and stop the game clock or to not to start and stop the game clock.

This logic is no different than resuming play in our original play with a throw-in by Team A closest to the spot where A3 caught A2’s throw-in with no time run off the game clock. Yes, I do not agree with Mary with regard to the amount of time on the game clock, but that is a minor point, when there are officials that are advocating one of two actions that are not supported by rule: (1) A do over of the entire throw-in from the point the end of the timeout, or (2) the game is over.

MTD, Sr.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
[/B]

How do we solve this conundrum?

[/B][/QUOTE]Um,maybe by waiting until we see something in the rule or case book, or even posted on the NFHS web site, that will definitively tell us how to handle plays like this?

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

blindzebra:

I have reposted my play above in order to discuss your response of Dec 18/Sat., 2004 10:28pm which was:

"What you described is an official NEGLECTING to signal time in on a throw in touched on the floor, and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the play in question. This play falls under a Timer's error, because of the little, "The timer is AUTHORIZED to start the clock per rule if the official NEGLECTS to signal," in 5-9-1.

Once again, 5-9-1 is the rule that STARTS the clock. 5-9-2, 3 and 4 are when that SIGNAL is to be given.

Yes B1 may re-enter, and I'd leave the clock as it is, because the only options, by rule, is to take a full second off the clock for lag time, or go back to the last know time."


You are forgetting some of the fundamentals of basketball. Here are some examples: (1) The Scorer’s signal does not cause a live ball to become dead. (2) The official’s whistle does not always cause a live ball to become dead. And (3) The Timer’s signal does not always cause a live ball to become dead. It is the same for a live ball becoming dead. The vast majority of the time it is a player’s actions cause a live ball to become dead.

At one time there were only two ways that an official could cause a dead ball to become live: (1) The official released the ball for a jump ball. And (2) the official placed the ball at the disposal of a free throw shooter. During throw-ins the ball did not change from a dead ball to a live ball until the throw-in was touched a player or was touched by a player on the court.

What am I saying? It is actions by the players, for the most part, that cause a live ball to become dead. This same logic says that it is players’ actions that dictate when the game clock starts. It is the actions of the players that cause the game clock to start on a throw-in, not the actions of the official and/or Timer that causes the game clock to start. And more importantly, the failure of an official and/or Timer to do or not to do something does negate the fact that it is players’ actions that causes the clock to start. What does this mean? It means that if the official signals time in and/or the Timer starts the clock before the players’ actions cause the game clock to start, the players’ actions dictate what happens next. The players’ actions cannot be negated and the time on the game clock is not correct. What to do? What to do? Correct the game clock and resume play from the point of interruption.


bz, lets look your answer to the four plays that I posted. You stated that B1 can replace B6 in all four plays. You have stated that the game official made a mistake in not signaling time in, and mistakes by the game officials (not to be confused with correctable errors) cannot be corrected.


In Plays A-1 and A-2, the Timer did not start the game clock because the game official did not signal time in. Was the Timer correct in not starting the game clock because the game official did not signal time in, or did the Timer make a mistake in not starting the game clock as authorized by R5-S9-A1? Which is it? If the Timer was correct in not starting the game clock then B1 cannot re-enter the game and replace B6. If the Timer did start the game clock as authorized by R5-S9-A1, then B1 can re-enter the game to replace B6, but how can the game clock be adjusted to reflect the correct time, if the game officials do not have definite knowledge of how much time should actually be on the game clock?


In Plays B-1 and B-2, was the Timer incorrect in starting the game clock because the game official was incorrect in not signaling time in or was the Timer correct in starting the game clock as authorized in R5-S9-A1? Which is it? If the time was incorrect in starting the game clock, then B1 cannot re-enter the game to replace B6, and does that mean that the game clock must be reset to show no elapsed time
? If the Timer was correct in starting the game clock then B1 can re-enter the game to replace B6 and we resume play with the time on the game clock as the correct time.


We have two sets of plays that are identical for all intents and purposes, yet by using your logic we can have conflicting interpretations. What to do? What to do?


How do we solve this conundrum? Easy use logic and apply the fundamentals of the game. The players’ actions caused the game clock to start, whether or not time was actually runoff the game clock. Therefore B1 can re-enter the game for B6. The time on the game clock in all four plays remain as is when play was stopped for A3’s out-of-bounds violation. The type of action in all four plays happen so very quickly, that it is equally possible for the Timer to start and stop the game clock or to not to start and stop the game clock.

This logic is no different than resuming play in our original play with a throw-in by Team A closest to the spot where A3 caught A2’s throw-in with no time run off the game clock. Yes, I do not agree with Mary with regard to the amount of time on the game clock, but that is a minor point, when there are officials that are advocating one of two actions that are not supported by rule: (1) A do over of the entire throw-in from the point the end of the timeout, or (2) the game is over.

MTD, Sr.

If I wanted to read a War and Peace sized novel, I'd do it. I really believe you go into all this detail so that we can't see just how flawed your argument is.

This is simple, and if you can't make a point in a couple of paragraphs, you don't have one.

Your play of the spiked throw in IS SUPPORTED by 5-9-1 reguardless of whether the timer started the clock or not. If they start it it is supported by rule, under the official NEGLECTED to signal part of 5-9-1, if not, neither had the time to react to the interval of when the clock should have started and stopped again.

The sub IS allowed because the clock SHOULD have ran, whether it did or not.

Lastly, just what does this play have to do with our original play? The rule says the timer is to start the clock on the signal, that signal is given BASED on the players actions. We have an authorization for the timer to start on the action if there is NO SIGNAL. There are 5 case plays dealing with the timer ignoring the official's signal to start or stop the clock, and how to fix them, yet you are INCORRECTLY suggesting that the timer SHOULD ignore the signal in this case.

Where are the fundamentals in that decision?

[Edited by blindzebra on Dec 19th, 2004 at 05:04 PM]

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

How do we solve this conundrum?

[/B]

Um,maybe by waiting until we see something in the rule or case book, or even posted on the NFHS web site, that will definitively tell us how to handle plays like this? [/B][/QUOTE]

We know how to handle it correctly in Arizona.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by blindzebra
[B]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

blindzebra:

I have reposted my play above in order to discuss your response of Dec 18/Sat., 2004 10:28pm which was:

"What you described is an official NEGLECTING to signal time in on a throw in touched on the floor, and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the play in question. This play falls under a Timer's error, because of the little, "The timer is AUTHORIZED to start the clock per rule if the official NEGLECTS to signal," in 5-9-1.

Once again, 5-9-1 is the rule that STARTS the clock. 5-9-2, 3 and 4 are when that SIGNAL is to be given.

Yes B1 may re-enter, and I'd leave the clock as it is, because the only options, by rule, is to take a full second off the clock for lag time, or go back to the last know time."


You are forgetting some of the fundamentals of basketball. Here are some examples: (1) The Scorer’s signal does not cause a live ball to become dead. (2) The official’s whistle does not always cause a live ball to become dead. And (3) The Timer’s signal does not always cause a live ball to become dead. It is the same for a live ball becoming dead. The vast majority of the time it is a player’s actions cause a live ball to become dead.

At one time there were only two ways that an official could cause a dead ball to become live: (1) The official released the ball for a jump ball. And (2) the official placed the ball at the disposal of a free throw shooter. During throw-ins the ball did not change from a dead ball to a live ball until the throw-in was touched a player or was touched by a player on the court.

What am I saying? It is actions by the players, for the most part, that cause a live ball to become dead. This same logic says that it is players’ actions that dictate when the game clock starts. It is the actions of the players that cause the game clock to start on a throw-in, not the actions of the official and/or Timer that causes the game clock to start. And more importantly, the failure of an official and/or Timer to do or not to do something does negate the fact that it is players’ actions that causes the clock to start. What does this mean? It means that if the official signals time in and/or the Timer starts the clock before the players’ actions cause the game clock to start, the players’ actions dictate what happens next. The players’ actions cannot be negated and the time on the game clock is not correct. What to do? What to do? Correct the game clock and resume play from the point of interruption.


bz, lets look your answer to the four plays that I posted. You stated that B1 can replace B6 in all four plays. You have stated that the game official made a mistake in not signaling time in, and mistakes by the game officials (not to be confused with correctable errors) cannot be corrected.


In Plays A-1 and A-2, the Timer did not start the game clock because the game official did not signal time in. Was the Timer correct in not starting the game clock because the game official did not signal time in, or did the Timer make a mistake in not starting the game clock as authorized by R5-S9-A1? Which is it? If the Timer was correct in not starting the game clock then B1 cannot re-enter the game and replace B6. If the Timer did start the game clock as authorized by R5-S9-A1, then B1 can re-enter the game to replace B6, but how can the game clock be adjusted to reflect the correct time, if the game officials do not have definite knowledge of how much time should actually be on the game clock?


In Plays B-1 and B-2, was the Timer incorrect in starting the game clock because the game official was incorrect in not signaling time in or was the Timer correct in starting the game clock as authorized in R5-S9-A1? Which is it? If the time was incorrect in starting the game clock, then B1 cannot re-enter the game to replace B6, and does that mean that the game clock must be reset to show no elapsed time
? If the Timer was correct in starting the game clock then B1 can re-enter the game to replace B6 and we resume play with the time on the game clock as the correct time.


We have two sets of plays that are identical for all intents and purposes, yet by using your logic we can have conflicting interpretations. What to do? What to do?


How do we solve this conundrum? Easy use logic and apply the fundamentals of the game. The players’ actions caused the game clock to start, whether or not time was actually runoff the game clock. Therefore B1 can re-enter the game for B6. The time on the game clock in all four plays remain as is when play was stopped for A3’s out-of-bounds violation. The type of action in all four plays happen so very quickly, that it is equally possible for the Timer to start and stop the game clock or to not to start and stop the game clock.

This logic is no different than resuming play in our original play with a throw-in by Team A closest to the spot where A3 caught A2’s throw-in with no time run off the game clock. Yes, I do not agree with Mary with regard to the amount of time on the game clock, but that is a minor point, when there are officials that are advocating one of two actions that are not supported by rule: (1) A do over of the entire throw-in from the point the end of the timeout, or (2) the game is over.

MTD, Sr.

If I wanted to read a War and Peace sized novel, I'd do it. I really believe you go into all this detail so that we can't see just how flawed your argument is.

This is simple, and if you can't make a point in a couple of paragraphs, you don't have one.

Your play of the spiked throw in IS SUPPORTED by 5-9-1 reguardless of whether the timer started the clock or not. If they start it it is supported by rule, under the official NEGLECTED to signal part of 5-9-1, if not, neither had the time to react to the interval of when the clock should have started and stopped again.

The sub IS allowed because the clock SHOULD have ran, whether it did or not.

Lastly, just what does this play have to do with our original play? The rule says the timer is to start the clock on the signal, that signal is given BASED on the players actions. We have an authorization for the timer to start on the action if there is NO SIGNAL. There are 5 case plays dealing with the timer ignoring the official's signal to start or stop the clock, and how to fix them, yet you are INCORRECTLY suggesting that the timer SHOULD ignore the signal in this case.

Where are the fundamentals in that decision?

[Edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. on Dec 19th, 2004 at 06:22 PM]

[blindzebra]

Mark this is directly from your longwinded post:

MTD says, "You have stated that the game official made a mistake in not signaling time in, and mistakes by the game officials (not to be confused with correctable errors) cannot be corrected."

Let's look at that last line again, MTD says, " Mistakes by the game officials (not to be confused with correctable errors) CANNOT BE CORRECTED."

Would that be like erroneously signaling time to start, as in rule 5-9-1?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BushRef
Can't we just end this once and for all please?

That's completely ignorant!!

Edited to delete that picture from my post.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Dec 19th, 2004 at 07:59 PM]

[blindzebra]

You should get banned from this forum for that post. I'd suggest you work some Special Olympic events, and perhaps you'd be less likely to make such an utterly stupid and insensitive post.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by BushRef
I'd suggest maybe I have.

You obviously got nothing from it, because anyone with a heart and a brain that spent any time around the developmentally disabled, could not have used that picture in a post.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by BushRef
Get over yourself blind. Why can't you all just agree to disagree and move on to something else.

This is not about MTD and my debate, this is about your use of that disgusting picture, so don't even TRY to deflect this. You used that sick image, so you are damned sure going to take the heat you completely deserve.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by BushRef
bring it on.

It's been brought, it figures you had not noticed. What will your next username be?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by blindzebra
Mark this is directly from your longwinded post:

MTD says, "You have stated that the game official made a mistake in not signaling time in, and mistakes by the game officials (not to be confused with correctable errors) cannot be corrected."

Let's look at that last line again, MTD says, " Mistakes by the game officials (not to be confused with correctable errors) CANNOT BE CORRECTED."

Would that be like erroneously signaling time to start, as in rule 5-9-1?

bz:

I was just repeating what you have been advocating: That mistakes by officials cannot be corrected. I wanted to clarify that mistakes by officials are not the same as correctable errors.

And you have been advocating that an official that erroneously signaling time in is a mistake by the official. I agree that it is a mistake by an official but it is not a correctable error.

MTD, Sr.