Another first for me

ChuckElias · #1 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 09, 2005, 09:59pm

Last week, I had a kid win a game at the line with no time on the clock. First time I'd ever had that in a game. http://www.officialforum.com/thread/18886

Tonight, another first. Regional semi-final HS playoff game. D3 (smallest division in MA) boys game. This had been a great game throughout. Coaches coaching, kids playing hard, but not dirty. Not a lot of fouls in the first half. Decent partners.

Fast forward to the closing seconds of the 2nd half. Team A (higher seed) is winning by 4 points and A1 is fouled with 8.6 seconds. A1 makes the first FT, then misses the second on purpose, I think, so that the clock will run. The tactic works as the rebound is batted around for a couple seconds.

B1 secures the rebound and pushes it upcourt, passes to B2 who hits a 3. Team A now leads by only 2. Coach B screams for a TO and my partner blows the whistle to grant the TO. When the whistle blows, I look at the clock and see 0.6 seconds. The clock then continues to 0.0 and the horn sounds.

I was the referee on this game. Everybody in the place knows that there was time left on the clock. But I know that we don't correct the clock if it falls within that one second of "lag time". ("The rules do not permit the referee to correct situations resulting in normal reaction time of the timer which results in a 'lag' [one second or less] in stopping the clock.") I talk with my partners and we agree that the 0.6 cannot be put back on the clock.

Game over.

Coach B then predictably goes nuts, screaming for us to come back. Then when we don't go back, he follows us into the tunnel. "Even if it's just one-tenth, put it up and let us play it!", which seems to me to be reasonable, but against the rules.

Me: "Coach, if you want me to explain the rule. . ."

Coach B: "Ahhhh, you're nothing but two-bit f$*#@!g whores!"

At which point, I went to the locker room and he was quickly shooed back out of the tunnel.

Now, I am convinced that we administered the situation correctly, despite the unfortunate result. I truly feel awful about having this great game end as a result of a slow timer. So I want to hear the comments from all of you as to (1) whether you agree that we administered the situation correctly and (2) how we might have handled it better to avoid the coach's meltdown.

And skip the advice about reporting the coach; it's already in the works.

tjones1 · #2 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 09, 2005, 10:28pm

Chuck,

(1) I think you nailed the call.

(2) The only thing that comes to mind is run to the locker room and shut the door. That way there's not a chance for the coach to vent on your crew. But, you probably did that anyways. It's understandable that the coach might be/is upset, however that's not an excuse or a free pass to go after the officials and demand time be put back on the clock.

Dan_ref · #3 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 09, 2005, 10:44pm

The nfhs lag rule is stupid.

I agree you got it right by nfhs rule. I agree it is reasonable for you to have put the 0.6 back on & let them play. I guess you could have ignored the stupid nfhs rule & put the time back on...of course you would have then posted that A violated on their throw-in and B won the game on a 3 on their throw-in. Stupid rule.

Let us know what comes of your report.

Did I mention the lag rule is stupid.

Adam · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 09, 2005, 10:58pm

Quote:

Originally posted by ChuckElias

And skip the advice about reporting the coach; it's already in the works.

Report him? I think you should have had him shot.

cmathews · #5 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 09, 2005, 11:16pm

Nice job Chuck, and it really is too bad it had to end that way...as opposed to shooting the coach maybe he should be infested with some awful disease from some 2 bit *$&#(&ing whore, one which requires the insertion of a searing hot rod into a very uncomfortable place

I gotta quit watching deadwood on hbo....

canuckrefguy · #6 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 09, 2005, 11:25pm

Chuck,

You're worth a lot more than two bits. You did the right thing, by the book, in the most professional manner possible.

That coach may be feeling a bit embarrassed today. I'm not getting my hopes up, but we can always dream....

SMEngmann · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 12:25am

A couple points, first, I agree the lag time rule could be modified, but how? We don't have the types of replay systems that they have in college, so there's really no way to put an exact time on the board. In most of the situations, I think it's an official's guess as to how much time was left, which is really not better than lag time (I see this a lot with the shot clock, if there's an erroneous reset, the conclusion will be something like "Ahh just put 27 seconds up there."

In regards to the coaches behavior, I'd definitely report it because it needs to be reported, but I'd cut the guy a little slack. He got screwed by a bad rule and it ended his season, he was good the whole game and he was just venting his anger at the shirt and not you. Again, clearly inappropriate, but 5 months of hard work just fell short in his mind because of a rule technicality. I'm sure if he had the moment back, he'd act differently, so I'd have empathy here and hightail it into the officials room. Way to handle the situation.

Nevadaref · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 12:57am

Chuck,
Have you seen the highlights from the end of the Kings/Grizzlies game on March 8? Memphis got hosed by a bad timing rule.

I was impressed with the official taking the time to explain the situation to coach Mike Fratello BEFORE they left the court. He still felt that they got screwed, but he didn't scream and act like a moron because he got the explanation that the officials were powerless to fix the situation.

Perhaps if you had done the same at the end of your game the ugliness with the coach could have been prevented.

I might also have instructed the PA announcer to announce something like "By rule the officials cannot put less than 1 second back on the clock and the game is over," as we left the court so that the fans would calm down a bit.

PS Way to be a MAN and do it right, partner! Sometimes you take more grief for being right than for taking the easy way.

Nevadaref · #9 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 01:05am

Chuck,
I just remembered a line from the case book that might have helped you.

You wrote: "When the whistle blows, I look at the clock and see 0.6 seconds. The clock then continues to 0.0 and the horn sounds."

Oh, now that I look it up, it is actually in the same paragraph that you quoted earlier.

I'm thinking of "One second or the "reaction" time is interpreted to have elapsed from the time the signal was made until the official glanced at the clock." (5.10.1 Sit B Comment on page 41.)

This would be your only justification for putting back .6 seconds, if you were so inclined.

Rich · #10 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 07:01am

Quote:

Originally posted by SMEngmann
A couple points, first, I agree the lag time rule could be modified, but how? We don't have the types of replay systems that they have in college, so there's really no way to put an exact time on the board. In most of the situations, I think it's an official's guess as to how much time was left, which is really not better than lag time (I see this a lot with the shot clock, if there's an erroneous reset, the conclusion will be something like "Ahh just put 27 seconds up there."

In regards to the coaches behavior, I'd definitely report it because it needs to be reported, but I'd cut the guy a little slack. He got screwed by a bad rule and it ended his season, he was good the whole game and he was just venting his anger at the shirt and not you. Again, clearly inappropriate, but 5 months of hard work just fell short in his mind because of a rule technicality. I'm sure if he had the moment back, he'd act differently, so I'd have empathy here and hightail it into the officials room. Way to handle the situation.

Oh, bullsh1t. Read the coach's comments again. Nobody should be talked to in that fashion.

Jurassic Referee · #11 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 07:35am

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

Quote:

Originally posted by SMEngmann
In regards to the coaches behavior, I'd definitely report it because it needs to be reported, but I'd cut the guy a little slack. He got screwed by a bad rule and it ended his season,

Oh, bullsh1t. Read the coach's comments again. Nobody should be talked to in that fashion. [/B]

Agree with Rich completely.

The coach never got screwed by a bad rule. The coach never got screwed by anybody. The bottom line is that the correct call was made. The only people that might have gotten screwed if Chuck put the 0.6 seconds back on the clock woulda been the other team.

There is no excuse at all for that coach's behaviour. Cutting the coach some slack won't help the next crew that gets him, if he knows he's only gonna get a slap on the wrist.

Dan_ref · #12 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 07:48am

Quote:

Originally posted by SMEngmann
A couple points, first, I agree the lag time rule could be modified, but how? We don't have the types of replay systems that they have in college, so there's really no way to put an exact time on the board. In most of the situations, I think it's an official's guess as to how much time was left, which is really not better than lag time (I see this a lot with the shot clock, if there's an erroneous reset, the conclusion will be something like "Ahh just put 27 seconds up there."

This is why it's a stupid rule: if more than 1 second comes off erroneously then we get to set the clock back to the *proper* time. IOO if the clock operator is good enough to stop it under 1 second we can't do anything about it. If he's sleeping and doesn't stop it in under a second we can fix it completely. But in no event are we permitted to guess at what the clock should be. We can only act on definite knowledge, which Chuck had in this case.

And btw, there are lots of ncaa games played without a monitor at tableside.

ronny mulkey · #13 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 08:02am

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Chuck,
I just remembered a line from the case book that might have helped you.

You wrote: "When the whistle blows, I look at the clock and see 0.6 seconds. The clock then continues to 0.0 and the horn sounds."

Oh, now that I look it up, it is actually in the same paragraph that you quoted earlier.

I'm thinking of "One second or the "reaction" time is interpreted to have elapsed from the time the signal was made until the official glanced at the clock." (5.10.1 Sit B Comment on page 41.)

This would be your only justification for putting back .6 seconds, if you were so inclined.

I agree with Nevada. If Chuck looked at the clock and then blew his whistle - game over. If he blew his whistle and then looked at the clock, then he would be justified in putting the clock back to .6 seconds.

Mulk

ChrisSportsFan · #14 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 08:24am

I don't really think this is the right thing to do but I would probably make a copy of the rule book page with the rule highlighted and mail it to him. No comments and no return address. Let him stew on it more once he knows you applied the rules correctly.

FrankHtown · #15 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 10, 2005, 09:04am

Look at 5.10.1 D, which makes the original call correct, by rule. It's the case where the referee SEES 5 seconds left, but timer lets clock run to 4 seconds. Ruling: No obvious timing mistake.

I don't think there is a case for putting 0.6 back on the clock.

If you want to put the SEEN time back on the clock, I guess you hope the timer really screws up, and let's it go more than 1 second.