HS: Re-do throw in

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote me a rule that would negate Team A's throw-in play?

[/B]

Naw, I think that I'll let BlindZebra play with ya again. I'm tired of this one. [/B][/QUOTE]


JR:

Your tired because you know I am correct. Have a pleasant evening. I know you are getting cabin fever with no NHL up there in the Great White North.

MTD, Sr.

[Texas Aggie]

>>The clock must be reset to the time that the officials definitely knew was on the clock and this is 3.18 seconds.<<

There's no authority by any rule that I'm aware of for a reset. The rule allowing the official to correct the time requires "definite" knowledge; i.e., he knew what was on the clock and what should have been on the clock, albeit not to a precise degree.

When you start speaking of "definite knowledge" then its just as correct to allow the game to end as it did originally (with no more than 2 seconds unaccounted for), since the officials do not have definite knowledge 3.18 seconds did not elapse. If they did have such knowledge, then they know what time to reset the clock at and potentially allow a throw in, and it isn't 3.18, and not a redo.

At least I can see a throw in after the first screw up. Is there anyone that can justify a third redo?

Don't get yourself in this situation: unless you have definite knowledge, declare the game over and get off the court. You may have made a mistake, but you will certainly make a bigger mistake if you stay out there. The team that loses isn't going to like the outcome, and doing it five times isn't going to make them like it any better.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote me a rule that would negate Team A's throw-in play?

[/B]

Naw, I think that I'll let BlindZebra play with ya again. I'm tired of this one. [/B][/QUOTE]

Leave me out of it.

[just another ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Team A did nothing wrong in this play.

How is this statement relative to your theory? You are saying, I suppose, that since Team A did nothing wrong you should not penalize them by making them throw this difficult pass again. BUT, what did Team B do wrong? Is giving Team A the ball in the frontcourt with no time elapsed not penalizing Team B?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by just another ref

How is this statement relative to your theory? You are saying, I suppose, that since Team A did nothing wrong you should not penalize them by making them throw this difficult pass again. BUT, what did Team B do wrong? Is giving Team A the ball in the frontcourt with no time elapsed not penalizing Team B?

In the original play there was 3.18 seconds left on the game clock and the clock was started too soon so that the game clock had it zero and the horn sounded when A3 caught A2's throw-in pass. Lets change the time on the game clock to 3:55 and when A3 catches A2's inbounds pass you notice that the clock already shows 3:52, you now that it should say 3:55. I hope that you wouldn't make Team A redo its throw-in after adding three seconds to the game clock.

MTD, Sr.

[just another ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

In the original play there was 3.18 seconds left on the game clock and the clock was started too soon so that the game clock had it zero and the horn sounded when A3 caught A2's throw-in pass. Lets change the time on the game clock to 3:55 and when A3 catches A2's inbounds pass you notice that the clock already shows 3:52, you now that it should say 3:55. I hope that you wouldn't make Team A redo its throw-in after adding three seconds to the game clock.

MTD, Sr.

If this happens at 3:55, you can do whatever you want and nobody will ever remember this play. We are talking about a small amount of time at the end of a game, or at least a quarter. According to your theory, if there is .3 on the clock and this happens, now you will give them the ball in frontcourt with the same .3 on the clock? I wanna be there to watch the discussion when that happens.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by just another ref

If this happens at 3:55, you can do whatever you want and nobody will ever remember this play. We are talking about a small amount of time at the end of a game, or at least a quarter. According to your theory, if there is .3 on the clock and this happens, now you will give them the ball in frontcourt with the same .3 on the clock? I wanna be there to watch the discussion when that happens.

Don't waste your time.

Logic and a lack of rule citation have no effect on MTD. If it's his opinion it's right even if he can't support it.

If you argue about it, he'll just call you inexperienced, question your ability to work a game, and give you his resume.

[SamIAm]

I watched the end of the game on replay. Interesting. I think part of the problem was created by the game being played on a neutral court, but with one teams scorer and timekeeper. The timekeeper was unfamiliar with the timing equipment being used. That could explain how the clock was not reset properly for the second go-round and how the clock could not be reset properly for the third go-round.