3.6 not 2.8 secs left and bad stuff happens

[Nevadaref]

I went and watched a good friend of mine work a GV game last week. It turned out to be one heck of contest. White misses two FTs with the score tied and 7.8 seconds on the clock. There is a scramble for the ball and Green comes up with it, but the player is on one knee and surrounded. She smartly requests a time-out. This is granted with 3.6 seconds remaining.
Following the time-out Green will inbound from a designated spot on the endline at White's basket on the tableside. The R is administering the throw-in. The inbounder throws a long, diagonal pass that is knocked immediately OOB about seven feet past the divison line on the opposite side of the court from the table by her teammate. The player who hit the ball and the defender were right up against the sideline and knocked the ball straight down and OOB directly in front of the C, who was my friend and he immediately hit the whistle and made the call. Since White will now be getting the ball they request a time-out. I look at the clock and it still shows 3.6 seconds. I know for certain that the clock did not move because I wrote down the times of all of the time-outs during the game. That is something that I always do when I observe games.
The timer hit the horn and the R went over the the table said something and then left.
Now, my friend, the U2, goes over to the R, still during the time-out, and has a little conversation. He later told me that he told him that the clock never started, and that it should have because the ball was definitely touched, otherwise they would be inbounding down on the endline. He asked the R if he wanted to do anything about the clock. The R said that he was just going to leave it where it was.
In my postgame talk with my friend, we discussed that no one had count and it would be difficult to ascertain such a short amount of time anyway, perhaps 3/10ths of a second. Therefore, I told him that, according to the rules, in the absence of definite knowledge the clock has to be left as is even though it looks bad. The timer just made a small error.
Of course, my friend is now the Trail opposite table for the critical last possession. The ball is inbounded to a guard who drives the ball up court to the foul line and dishes to a post player on the block. She catches spins and tosses one up AT THE BUZZER. Naturally, the ball bounces on the ring a bit and falls in. My friend counted the basket and the home team won by two.
I happened to be sitting about twenty feet away from the shooter on that side of the court, and I thought that the shot was just a hair late. It was so darn close though. Calling it good was certainly NOT obviously wrong.
Anyway, after the final two league games on Friday and Saturday, the team that won this game ended the season tied for the final playoff berth with another school. This team won the head-to-head tiebreaker. So this whole sequence did have significant meaning.
Now, I'm not relating this story to knock my friend (He is great official and will work a regional final and at the state tournament this year.), but I am looking for feedback on how some of you would have handled the clock situation (as either the U2 or the R) and if this would have made any difference in your call on the final shot. We have agreed that the shot may well have been good in the 3.6 seconds, but it would not have counted in anything less. Of course, White would likely have played it differently too with less time on the clock. So do guys feel that all was done fairly? Thanks.

PS rainmaker, notice that this happened with 3.6, not 2.8!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
I went and watched a good friend of mine work a GV game last week. It turned out to be one heck of contest. White misses two FTs with the score tied and 7.8 seconds on the clock. There is a scramble for the ball and Green comes up with it, but the player is on one knee and surrounded. She smartly requests a time-out. This is granted with 3.6 seconds remaining.
Following the time-out Green will inbound from a designated spot on the endline at White's basket on the tableside. The R is administering the throw-in. The inbounder throws a long, diagonal pass that is knocked immediately OOB about seven feet past the divison line on the opposite side of the court from the table by her teammate. The player who hit the ball and the defender were right up against the sideline and knocked the ball straight down and OOB directly in front of the C, who was my friend and he immediately hit the whistle and made the call. Since White will now be getting the ball they request a time-out. I look at the clock and it still shows 3.6 seconds. I know for certain that the clock did not move because I wrote down the times of all of the time-outs during the game. That is something that I always do when I observe games.
The timer hit the horn and the R went over the the table said something and then left.
Now, my friend, the U2, goes over to the R, still during the time-out, and has a little conversation. He later told me that he told him that the clock never started, and that it should have because the ball was definitely touched, otherwise they would be inbounding down on the endline. He asked the R if he wanted to do anything about the clock. The R said that he was just going to leave it where it was.
In my postgame talk with my friend, we discussed that no one had count and it would be difficult to ascertain such a short amount of time anyway, perhaps 3/10ths of a second. Therefore, I told him that, according to the rules, in the absence of definite knowledge the clock has to be left as is even though it looks bad. The timer just made a small error.
Of course, my friend is now the Trail opposite table for the critical last possession. The ball is inbounded to a guard who drives the ball up court to the foul line and dishes to a post player on the block. She catches spins and tosses one up AT THE BUZZER. Naturally, the ball bounces on the ring a bit and falls in. My friend counted the basket and the home team won by two.
I happened to be sitting about twenty feet away from the shooter on that side of the court, and I thought that the shot was just a hair late. It was so darn close though. Calling it good was certainly NOT obviously wrong.
Anyway, after the final two league games on Friday and Saturday, the team that won this game ended the season tied for the final playoff berth with another school. This team won the head-to-head tiebreaker. So this whole sequence did have significant meaning.
Now, I'm not relating this story to knock my friend (He is great official and will work a regional final and at the state tournament this year.), but I am looking for feedback on how some of you would have handled the clock situation (as either the U2 or the R) and if this would have made any difference in your call on the final shot. We have agreed that the shot may well have been good in the 3.6 seconds, but it would not have counted in anything less. Of course, White would likely have played it differently too with less time on the clock. So do guys feel that all was done fairly? Thanks.

PS rainmaker, notice that this happened with 3.6, not 2.8!

Nevadaref:

The game officials handled it correctly.

MTD, Sr.

P.S. Good night all.

[ChuckElias]

Bring the clock down to 3.3 seconds.

I know that's not right in FED rules, but the NBA has a minimum amount of time that MUST come off the clock anytime the ball is legally touched inbounds. I would like the FED to adopt a rule of this type when the clock shows tenths of a second.

[Kelvin green]

I agree with Chuck; something has to come off the clock. the official had definite knowledge that that clock did not start.
The sequence was throw in
Touch
Out of bounds
That is the definite knowledge.

if it was touched and then rolled 65 ft it would be a longer time than touch then OOB immediately. I figure given right next to sideline .3-.5 would be sufficient

I can almost bet why the clock did not start. The timer was watching T with the throwin and the chop instead of watching the ball. Personally this is a situation where we should discuss the throw-in with each other and the timer. In a tied ball game team wants to score. We should anticpate long pass and help timer...

I also agree with Chuck we need this in the rules....

[Dan_ref]

I agree, some time's gotta come off the clock.

.3 seconds is as good a number as any.

[blindzebra]

Well until they put that change in the rules no time can come off, unless you want to wiggle in lag time and chop a second.

[BoomerSooner]

The fact of the matter is that as officials we have no control direct control over starting the clock (most of us can't stop it either but precision timing has changed that for some), and we will continue to be at the mercy of the timer in situations like this. We can only follow the rules, and as stated earlier the officials handled it properly. Is it right? No, because we have know the clock should have moved. But how much? We don't know, so you can't do anything because any amount of time you take off would likely be wrong (nothing more than an estimation), and mama always said 2 wrongs don't make a right.

[Red_Killian]

Originally posted by Kelvin green
I agree with Chuck; something has to come off the clock. the official had definite knowledge that that clock did not start.
The sequence was throw in
Touch
Out of bounds
That is the definite knowledge.

if it was touched and then rolled 65 ft it would be a longer time than touch then OOB immediately. I figure given right next to sideline .3-.5 would be sufficient

I can almost bet why the clock did not start. The timer was watching T with the throwin and the chop instead of watching the ball. Personally this is a situation where we should discuss the throw-in with each other and the timer. In a tied ball game team wants to score. We should anticpate long pass and help timer...

I also agree with Chuck we need this in the rules....

Kelvin, are you saying the timer was wrong to watch the T with the throwin and the chop? Suggesting they should watch the ball? Did the T ever chop the clock....this was never stated explicitly. At the end of close games I instruct the timer to watch the officials for the chop to start the clock. From what is described (no chop ever mentioned) you guys are beating up the timer too much.

[Gozer]

NFHS Rules state that there is a 1 second allowance for the timer to start and stop the clock... Sence it was tiped right out of bounds no time should have been taken off. I wouldnt have taken any off the clock. It was handled correctly.

Kenny

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Gozer
NFHS Rules state that there is a 1 second allowance for the timer to start and stop the clock...

Got a rule or case citation for that, Kenny?

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Gozer
NFHS Rules state that there is a 1 second allowance for the timer to start and stop the clock... Sence it was tiped right out of bounds no time should have been taken off. I wouldnt have taken any off the clock. It was handled correctly.

Kenny

No, no, no, no, no . . . . .

Take a much closer look at the "lag time" casebook play.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
Bring the clock down to 3.3 seconds.

I know that's not right in FED rules, but the NBA has a minimum amount of time that MUST come off the clock anytime the ball is legally touched inbounds. I would like the FED to adopt a rule of this type when the clock shows tenths of a second.

I'd probably leave the clock (but would be very tempted to change it), but if I could make one rule change in NFHS, it would be to adopt the NBA timing rules for how much time must come off the clock in certain situations. (And, it's close enough so I'll lump it in with my one rule change - eliminate lag time for clocks that display tenths of a second).

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

I'd probably leave the clock (but would be very tempted to change it), but if I could make one rule change in NFHS, it would be to adopt the NBA timing rules for how much time must come off the clock in certain situations. (And, it's close enough so I'll lump it in with my one rule change - eliminate lag time for clocks that display tenths of a second).

Chuck and Mark:

I think that you have both hit the nail on the head by identifying a problem in the NCAA and NFHS rules.

MTD, Sr.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Chuck and Mark:

I think that you have both hit the nail on the head by identifying a problem in the NCAA and NFHS rules.

MTD, Sr.

GREAT feedback guys! This is the main reason that I posted this play.
I agree with Chuck, MTD, Dexter, etc. and since I actually have the ability to do something about it, I will.

I have been given the NFHS rules change submission form for our state association and have been asked to submit a couple of changes that I think would benefit NFHS basketball. I am going to send in one on a mandatory amount of time that must come off the clock when the ball is touched inbounds and immediately knocked OOB.

Nevada also has a seat on the NFHS rules committee for next season. My name has been put into the mix for serving on the committee. I would be honored if I were chosen.
We'll see what happens.

[ditttoo]

No time off the clock due to "lack of specific knowledge" but a few questions/suggestions.

Did the crew discuss potential scenerios during the last dead ball to anticipate such a situation? Was the timer reminded of the need to concentrate on the chop? Why was the entire crew not specifically aware of "no time" running off the clock? Lots of varying details to learn from and incorporate in all future situations and even pregames, BUT no time off the clock! Very good job at a very critical time.