Sitch 2

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Daryl H. Long
Chuck,

See Rule 5.10.1 and 2.

Comment:The rule you reference is Rule 3.3.4.

In Rule 3.3.1d it talks about a substitute who is ENTITLED to enter.

Rule 2.12 gives the Timer's Duties.

The rules as written assume that the timers are competent and fully understand their duties respecting proper starting/stopping of the device.

If the conditions were such that the clock should have started thus entitling the substitute to reenter should we disregard this rule because the TIMER MADE A MISTAKE?

NO. Why? Because timers mistakes are covered in Rule 5.10.

Rule 5.10.1...the Referee may correct an obvious mistake by the timer to start or stop the clock properly only when he/she has definite information relative to the time involved.

Rule 5.10.2 says...If the referee determines that the clock was not started or stopped properly, or if the clock did not run, an officilas count or other information can be used to make a correction.

See my previous post for the "other information' I considered in making my decision to allow reentry or not.

Unfortunately, all that bafflegab above still hasn't changed the fact that the clock actually never did start. You can't take time off the clock now either because you don't have definitive knowledge under R5-10-2 as to how much time should be taken off. Do you take off 3/10 of a second? 5/10s of a second? One second? you just don't know, so you can't take anything off. Under a strict interpretation of R3-3-4, the substitution is not allowed. "Woulda, coulda, shoulda" aren't part of the rules.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Unfortunately, all that bafflegab above still hasn't changed the fact that the clock actually never did start. You can't take time off the clock now either because you don't have definitive knowledge under R5-10-2 as to how much time should be taken off. Do you take off 3/10 of a second? 5/10s of a second? One second? you just don't know, so you can't take anything off. Under a strict interpretation of R3-3-4, the substitution is not allowed. "Woulda, coulda, shoulda" aren't part of the rules.

I'm not following your bafflegab.

Are you saying the player should NOT be allowed to re-enter until some time has come off the clock?

I don't think the rule says that.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

I'm not following your bafflegab.

Are you saying the player should NOT be allowed to re-enter until some time has come off the clock?

I don't think the rule says that.

I think the rule does say that. The initial post in this thread says that the clock was not started. It didn't say that it was started and stopped. The rule says that the replaced player can't come back in until the clock has started properly. The clock didn't start at all- properly or improperly.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I think the rule does say that. The initial post in this thread says that the clock was not started. It didn't say that it was started and stopped. The rule says that the replaced player can't come back in until the clock has started properly. The clock didn't start at all- properly or improperly.

And how, exactly, do the officials *know* the clock did not start? Properly or improperly?

BTW, what if the crew have their heads up their @sses and we...errr...they go up & down the floor 4 times without the clock starting before a dead ball.

A1 can't re-enter?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

[/B]

And how, exactly, do the officials *know* the clock did not start? Properly or improperly?

[/B][/QUOTE]We know because lrpalmer3 said the clock didn't start in his initial post. We're just answering his questions using that little bit of info.

Anybody know where Chuck got to? He got me into this argument, and now he disappears.

Btw, to answer your other question, if we go up and down the floor 4 times in a JUCO game and the clock didn't start, then I'm taking 16 minutes off the time remaining.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 11th, 2005 at 01:22 PM]

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

And how, exactly, do the officials *know* the clock did not start? Properly or improperly?

[/B]

We know because lrpalmer3 said the clock didn't start in his initial post. We're just answering his questions using that little bit of info.

Anybody know where Chuck got to? He got me into this argument, and now he disappears.

Btw, to answer your other question, if we go up and down the floor 4 times in a JUCO game and the clock didn't start, then I'm taking 16 minutes off the time remaining.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 11th, 2005 at 01:22 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]



And T up A1 while you're at it...he's gonna get one eventually anyway.

[Camron Rust]

If an event occurs that should result in the clock starting, that is enough to subsequently allow the sub it.

If you interpret it any other way, a timekeeper could keep an opposing sub out of the game by never starting the clock. This would force you to blow the whistle to correct the clock (which was not properly started). Since it was not properly started, you couldn't allow the sub in.

The "properly started" is only there to make sure that a sub doesn't get to come in if the timer starts the clock when they shouldn't have started it.

[Daryl H. Long]

Jurassic is too concerned about putting bafflegab in all his posts lately.

Guess if he learns a new word all logical impulses of his brain cease.

If he is not smart enough to make a decision of elapsed time in case timer failed to do his duty and it is necessary for Referee to do so per Rule 5.10.1&2 then maybe he better just be the umpire in all his games.

[Daryl H. Long]

The initial post in this thread in my opinion did not have enough information. When he said B fouled he did not say what the status of the ball was. Was foul before ball touched or after?

I answered the question using both scenarios.

What is so hard to understand?

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Daryl H. Long
If he is not smart enough to make a decision of elapsed time in case timer failed to do his duty and it is necessary for Referee to do so per Rule 5.10.1&2 then maybe he better just be the umpire in all his games.

Instead of offering insults, why can't we discuss the applicable rule. It doesn't have anything to do with being smart. It has everything to do with whether or not the clock was properly started. That's what the rule says must happen. Why is there so much hub-bub about this? The sub may not re-enter until the first opportunity to substitute after the clock has properly started. Period. There's no interpretation that softens the rule to mean "after the clock should've started".

I'm not trying to sound holier-than-thou, but you guys who want to let the player in are just wrong by rule. There's not really any ambiguity for wiggle-room here. Sorry.

[Daryl H. Long]

I've discussed and explained the rule ad nauseum.

Chuck... Give me an example of a situation in which you as referee would correct a timer's mistake per Rule 5.10.

If you can not think of any then you have to admit that a timer's mistake could never happen and therefore should not be in the Rule book.

Remember also 2 other things when you reply:

1. If you determine timer did not start the clock properly then you ADMIT that it did not start when it SHOULD HAVE.

2. If you determine the timer did not stop the clock properly then you ADMIT it did not stop when it SHOULD HAVE.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Instead of offering insults, why can't we discuss the applicable rule. It doesn't have anything to do with being smart. It has everything to do with whether or not the clock was properly started. That's what the rule says must happen. Why is there so much hub-bub about this? The sub may not re-enter until the first opportunity to substitute after the clock has properly started. Period. There's no interpretation that softens the rule to mean "after the clock should've started".

I'm not trying to sound holier-than-thou, but you guys who want to let the player in are just wrong by rule. There's not really any ambiguity for wiggle-room here. Sorry.

Chuck:

That is why Daryl is always the R and I am always the U when we officiate because I always follow that late Danny Doss's advice: Never be the R.

MTD, Sr.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Oh boy, it looks like it is Camroon, Daryl and I against the world on this one.

MTD, Sr.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Daryl H. Long
Chuck... Give me an example of a situation in which you as referee would correct a timer's mistake per Rule 5.10.

There are plenty of instances where it's proper for the official to correct a timer's mistake. No one is denying that. That isn't the issue.

1. If you determine timer did not start the clock properly then you ADMIT that it did not start when it SHOULD HAVE.

Not only do I "admit" it, but that is the whole point of the argument. The timer did not start the clock. Therefore, the clock obviously did not start properly. Therefore, according to the rule, the sub cannot re-enter. QED.

I'm not sure what the heck else there is to say. The rule is black-and-white and unambiguous. Sub can't re-enter until the clock starts properly. Timer doesn't start the clock = Sub doesn't re-enter.

[Daryl H. Long]

Chuck,

I just want to make sure we are on the same wavelenght of which scenario we are discussing. Maybe then we can come to some sort of agreement.

Scenario 1.
A1 starts try.
B1 fouls A1.
Try successful
Whistle.
A1 is injured.
A6 replaces A1 and shoots free throw.
Misses and bounces off rim.
While ball in air and before ball is touched B2 fouls A2.
Whistle.
A1 reports to scorer's table as a sub.

In this case the clock did not start because the foul preceded touching of the ball. Timer acted properly and did not start the clock. As the official I would tell A1 he would have to wait until next opportunity to sub after clock has started properly.

Do you agree?