Sell this one!

[Ref in PA]

I am with JR on this one. The only time in NFHS you can put time back on the clock is when you have definite knowledge more than one second ran off the clock.

While BZ correctly quotes 5.10.1 Sit B, 5.10.1 Sit D is the specific play described and has a different interpretation. In case B of Sit D, the ref blows the whistle, looks at the clock and it says 5 seconds. The clock operator stops the clock at 4 seconds. The Case book says no timing mistake was made because of the one second lag time. The ref saw 5, but yet it was left at 4. The Fed is telling us that is ok. In the case where there is .6, that is where your definite knowledge begins. If more than a second runs off, then you can correct. Unfortunately, you don't have more than one second. Horn blows, game over. You can't correct.

I believe the case play and interpretation before I believe an ambiguously worded note in a completely different case.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Ref in PA
I am with JR on this one. The only time in NFHS you can put time back on the clock is when you have definite knowledge more than one second ran off the clock.

While BZ correctly quotes 5.10.1 Sit B, 5.10.1 Sit D is the specific play described and has a different interpretation. In case B of Sit D, the ref blows the whistle, looks at the clock and it says 5 seconds. The clock operator stops the clock at 4 seconds. The Case book says no timing mistake was made because of the one second lag time. The ref saw 5, but yet it was left at 4. The Fed is telling us that is ok. In the case where there is .6, that is where your definite knowledge begins. If more than a second runs off, then you can correct. Unfortunately, you don't have more than one second. Horn blows, game over. You can't correct.

I believe the case play and interpretation before I believe an ambiguously worded note in a completely different case.

That case play says the official was looking at the clock when they blew the whistle, which is the point of my contention with JR about this.

That info is missing from Nevada's play. If The official sees the clock at the whistle and it goes from .6 to zero, game over. However, if the whistle blows and THEN the official looks, 1 second lag time is not a factor because the interval from whistle to look is interpreted as 1 second lag time, and .6 is put back.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra

[/B]

That case play says the official was looking at the clock when they blew the whistle, which is the point of my contention with JR about this.

That info is missing from Nevada's play. If The official sees the clock at the whistle and it goes from .6 to zero, game over. However, if the whistle blows and THEN the official looks, 1 second lag time is not a factor because the interval from whistle to look is interpreted as 1 second lag time, and .6 is put back. [/B][/QUOTE]Care to explain how you can do that when there was 0.006 on the clock when the official blew his whistle, as per the very first post on this thread? That info wasn't missing at all.

From the first post- "She crosses the division line with 0.6 seconds on the clock and the coach immediately asks for a time-out. Since the official was looking for the request, he blows the whistle right away". Iow, the whistle was blown with 0.6 seconds on the clock. I don't care if the official was looking at the clock or not when he blew the whistle either with 0.6 seconds left.
1) If the official was looking at the clock, the timer is allowed 1 second lag time as per case book play 5.10.1SitD(b).
2) If the official isn't looking at the clock, then as per your cite-5.10.1SitA-COMMENT- "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." Take 1 second reaction time away from 0.6 of a second on the clock when the whistle blew and what do you have? No time on the clock! That one second "reaction" time to look at the clock means that the clock runs out in this case also.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

That case play says the official was looking at the clock when they blew the whistle, which is the point of my contention with JR about this.

That info is missing from Nevada's play. If The official sees the clock at the whistle and it goes from .6 to zero, game over. However, if the whistle blows and THEN the official looks, 1 second lag time is not a factor because the interval from whistle to look is interpreted as 1 second lag time, and .6 is put back. [/B]

Care to explain how you can do that when there was 0.006 on the clock when the official blew his whistle, as per the very first post on this thread? That info wasn't missing at all.

From the first post- "She crosses the division line with 0.6 seconds on the clock and the coach immediately asks for a time-out. Since the official was looking for the request, he blows the whistle right away". Iow, the whistle was blown with 0.6 seconds on the clock. I don't care if the official was looking at the clock or not when he blew the whistle either with 0.6 seconds left.
1) If the official was looking at the clock, the timer is allowed 1 second lag time as per case book play 5.10.1SitD(b).
2) If the official isn't looking at the clock, then as per your cite-5.10.1SitA-COMMENT- "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." Take 1 second reaction time away from 0.6 of a second on the clock when the whistle blew and what do you have? No time on the clock! That one second "reaction" time to look at the clock means that the clock runs out in this case also.

[/B][/QUOTE]

That means one second or whatever the reaction time is, not a literal 1 second, and you know it.

The official needs definite knowledge of 1 second lag time for us to allow a full second.

It still comes down to this:

Official looking at clock at whistle, lag time up to 1 second.

Official not looking, lag time is the interval between whistle and look.

Stop spinning it JR.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra

Care to explain how you can do that when there was 0.006 on the clock when the official blew his whistle, as per the very first post on this thread? That info wasn't missing at all.

From the first post- "She crosses the division line with 0.6 seconds on the clock and the coach immediately asks for a time-out. Since the official was looking for the request, he blows the whistle right away". Iow, the whistle was blown with 0.6 seconds on the clock. I don't care if the official was looking at the clock or not when he blew the whistle either with 0.6 seconds left.
1) If the official was looking at the clock, the timer is allowed 1 second lag time as per case book play 5.10.1SitD(b).
2) If the official isn't looking at the clock, then as per your cite-5.10.1SitA-COMMENT- "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." Take 1 second reaction time away from 0.6 of a second on the clock when the whistle blew and what do you have? No time on the clock! That one second "reaction" time to look at the clock means that the clock runs out in this case also.

[/B]

That means one second or whatever the reaction time is, not a literal 1 second, and you know it.

The official needs definite knowledge of 1 second lag time for us to allow a full second.

It still comes down to this:

Official looking at clock at whistle, lag time up to 1 second.

Official not looking, lag time is the interval between whistle and look.

Stop spinning it JR.


[/B][/QUOTE]Then how much EXACT time are you gonna put back on the clock? You've just blow the whistle with 0.6 seconds on the clock. You then have to take some time to look at the clock. How much time EXACTLY are you taking to make that look? How much time is showing EXACTLY on the clock after you've made that look?

Don't give me that doo-doo about "spinning" either, BZ. You the one that's trying to say that it takes ZERO time to make a call with 0.6 seconds the clock, then look at the clock and still see 0.6 seconds on the clock.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

That means one second or whatever the reaction time is, not a literal 1 second, and you know it.

The official needs definite knowledge of 1 second lag time for us to allow a full second.

It still comes down to this:

Official looking at clock at whistle, lag time up to 1 second.

Official not looking, lag time is the interval between whistle and look.

Stop spinning it JR.


[/B]

Then how much EXACT time are you gonna put back on the clock? You've just blow the whistle with 0.6 seconds on the clock. You then have to take some time to look at the clock. How much time EXACTLY are you taking to make that look? How much time is showing EXACTLY on the clock after you've made that look?

Don't give me that doo-doo about "spinning" either, BZ. You the one that's trying to say that it takes ZERO time to make a call with 0.6 seconds the clock, then look at the clock and still see 0.6 seconds on the clock. [/B][/QUOTE]

Once again I'm talking about this rule in general.

You are arguing that it is one second regardless, and it is not.

If the whistle went off with 1.6, 1.0, or .8 on the clock and the official then looked and saw .6 and it ran out, .6 is put back on.

Get it now?

The game could be over or there could be .6 on the clock.

[Edited by blindzebra on Dec 14th, 2005 at 05:36 PM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra

Then how much EXACT time are you gonna put back on the clock? You've just blow the whistle with 0.6 seconds on the clock. You then have to take some time to look at the clock. How much time EXACTLY are you taking to make that look? How much time is showing EXACTLY on the clock after you've made that look?

Don't give me that doo-doo about "spinning" either, BZ. You the one that's trying to say that it takes ZERO time to make a call with 0.6 seconds the clock, then look at the clock and still see 0.6 seconds on the clock. [/B]

Once again I'm talking about this rule in general.

You are arguing that it is one second regardless, and it is not.

If the whistle went off with 1.6, 1.0, or .8 on the clock and the official then looked and saw .6 and it ran out, .6 is put back on.

Get it now?

The game could be over or there could be .6 on the clock.

[/B][/QUOTE]Yup, I get it. You're still trying to spin your mistake. Your examples above aren't applicable in any way to this situation.

I'm talking about the rules relating to this play specifically, not generally. In this particular play, the whistle was blown with 0.6 of a second on the clock. The official then looked at the clock. You're trying to say that there's still 0.6 of a second on the clock after the official has taken the time to take that look. Iow, there was NO time at all taken by the official to make that look. That just ain't gonna fly, BZ. You can't look at the speed of light. I'm not arguing that the look is a full one second regardless. I'm arguing that it actually takes some time to take that look, and that you don't know exactly how much time that the look actually took, and if you don't know the exact time that the look took, then you can't put any time back up on the clock.

In the examples you gave above, there was time used by the official to take a look at the clock. In the situation you're arguing about, you're trying to say that there was NO time used. Apples and oranges.

If the official was looking directly at the clock when he blew the whistle with 0.6 of a second showing on the clock, he also can't put any time back on the clock either because of legal allowable lag time.

Either way, the game is over.

Get it now?

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Once again I'm talking about this rule in general.

You are arguing that it is one second regardless, and it is not.

If the whistle went off with 1.6, 1.0, or .8 on the clock and the official then looked and saw .6 and it ran out, .6 is put back on.

Get it now?

The game could be over or there could be .6 on the clock.

[/B]

Yup, I get it. You're still trying to spin your mistake. Your examples above aren't applicable in any way to this situation.

I'm talking about the rules relating to this play specifically, not generally. In this particular play, the whistle was blown with 0.6 of a second on the clock. The official then looked at the clock. You're trying to say that there's still 0.6 of a second on the clock after the official has taken the time to take that look. Iow, there was NO time at all taken by the official to make that look. That just ain't gonna fly, BZ. You can't look at the speed of light. I'm not arguing that the look is a full one second regardless. I'm arguing that it actually takes some time to take that look, and that you don't know exactly how much time that the look actually took, and if you don't know the exact time that the look took, then you can't put any time back up on the clock.

In the examples you gave above, there was time used by the official to take a look at the clock. In the situation you're arguing about, you're trying to say that there was NO time used. Apples and oranges.

If the official was looking directly at the clock when he blew the whistle with 0.6 of a second showing on the clock, he also can't put any time back on the clock either because of legal allowable lag time.

Either way, the game is over.

Get it now?
[/B][/QUOTE]

The time is whatever you see when you do look after the whistle, and it does not have to be more than a second for time to be put back up.

Even in this play, had the whistle blown at .6 and the official looked at .3 and the time then ran out, .3 should be put back on the clock per the comment for 5.10.1.

We don't have that info from Nevada's description.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Either way, the game is over.

I have to disagree, Jurassic.

If the official is not looking at the clock, blows the whistle, and then looks at the clock, by casebook play we are told to assume that the time between whistle and look is 1 second. That invokes the "1 second lag time" requirement of resetting the clock. We then reset the clock to the time that we saw when we looked up.

If the official is looking at the clock, the timer gets 1 second from the time displayed when the whistle blows. If the clock runs for more than 1 second, we reset the clock to the time displayed when the whistle blew.

If there was 0.6 on the clock when the whistle blew, and the official was NOT looking at the clock, we have our 1 second by interpretation. As such, if the official looks up (very quickly) and sees :00.6, he/she has to reset the clock to 0.6.

If the official saw the clock at :00.6 when the whistle blew, game over, no lag time applies.

Is the confusion stemming from the interpretation change a few years back? I know that, in the second situation (ref looking), you would give 1 second of lag time, and then reset the clock to that lag-timed value of time.

Either way, I agree with Chuck's proposal.

[Ref Daddy]

3.2 seconds remaining.
Missed Shot Rebounded.
Crosses the division line with 0.6 seconds on the clock Coach asks for the time-out.
Referee blows the whistle
Player ends her dribble and shoots.
While the ball is in the air horn sounds!
The ball goes in the basket.

Following this argument that no time should be placed back ... then why didn't the basket count? Which is the offical stop - the whistle or the clock?

If the player launched the thing before the horn ......

We need a Zapruder Film on this one!

[Rich]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Once again I'm talking about this rule in general.

You are arguing that it is one second regardless, and it is not.

If the whistle went off with 1.6, 1.0, or .8 on the clock and the official then looked and saw .6 and it ran out, .6 is put back on.

Get it now?

The game could be over or there could be .6 on the clock.

[/B]

Yup, I get it. You're still trying to spin your mistake. Your examples above aren't applicable in any way to this situation.

I'm talking about the rules relating to this play specifically, not generally. In this particular play, the whistle was blown with 0.6 of a second on the clock. The official then looked at the clock. You're trying to say that there's still 0.6 of a second on the clock after the official has taken the time to take that look. Iow, there was NO time at all taken by the official to make that look. That just ain't gonna fly, BZ. You can't look at the speed of light. I'm not arguing that the look is a full one second regardless. I'm arguing that it actually takes some time to take that look, and that you don't know exactly how much time that the look actually took, and if you don't know the exact time that the look took, then you can't put any time back up on the clock.

In the examples you gave above, there was time used by the official to take a look at the clock. In the situation you're arguing about, you're trying to say that there was NO time used. Apples and oranges.

If the official was looking directly at the clock when he blew the whistle with 0.6 of a second showing on the clock, he also can't put any time back on the clock either because of legal allowable lag time.

Either way, the game is over.

Get it now?
[/B][/QUOTE]

Mistake or not, I'm putting the time back on the clock and sleeping quite soundly that night.

[Daryl H. Long]

BlindZebra,

Stick to your guns. We had this discussion last year and I took the brunt of people not believing what I said when I wrote exactly as you did.

Bottom line is that the answer given by NF in Case book play 5.10.1Sit D(b) is flat out WRONG. In all situation a-d the correct answer is 5 seconds will remain or odered to be put on the clock by the referee.

Why?

For the very reason you stated. 5.10.1 Sit B Comment clearly states that "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.

This means that the time the official sees when he looks at the clock ALREADY INCLUDES THE LAG TIME. I will not allow for it twice.

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally posted by Ref in PA
I am with JR on this one. The only time in NFHS you can put time back on the clock is when you have definite knowledge more than one second ran off the clock.

While BZ correctly quotes 5.10.1 Sit B, 5.10.1 Sit D is the specific play described and has a different interpretation. In case B of Sit D, the ref blows the whistle, looks at the clock and it says 5 seconds. The clock operator stops the clock at 4 seconds. The Case book says no timing mistake was made because of the one second lag time. The ref saw 5, but yet it was left at 4. The Fed is telling us that is ok. In the case where there is .6, that is where your definite knowledge begins. If more than a second runs off, then you can correct. Unfortunately, you don't have more than one second. Horn blows, game over. You can't correct.

I believe the case play and interpretation before I believe an ambiguously worded note in a completely different case.

Ambiguous? How can that be from the "GODs" from the NF?
How can you trust the answer to 5.10.1SitD(b) to be the absolute gospel truth just because it came from the Gods at NF then you diss the Gods at NF by making the bold statement that their explanation of the criteria the officials MUST USE to determine lag time is an "AMBIGUOUSLY WORDED NOTE"?

I believe the NF makes mistakes in their printed material and will call them on it when I see it. If you don't belive the NF makes mistakes then read 3.4.15 Situation A on page 3 of the 05-06 NF Case Book. The ruling is WRONG. The correct ruling is A1 is a PLAYER and he alone gets the T. his status as a player does not change just because it is halftime.

[Edited by Daryl H. Long on Dec 14th, 2005 at 11:55 PM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Daryl H. Long
BlindZebra,

Stick to your guns. We had this discussion last year and I took the brunt of people not believing what I said when I wrote exactly as you did.

Bottom line is that the answer given by NF in Case book play 5.10.1Sit D(b) is flat out WRONG.

Yes, Daryl, the NFHS Case Book is wrong and Daryl H. Long and BlindZebra are right.

Lah me.

Un-freaking-believable.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Yes, Daryl, the NFHS Case Book is wrong and Daryl H. Long and BlindZebra are right.

Lah me.

Un-freaking-believable.

I'm not saying that this case play is incorrect, because it falls under the official seeing the clock as the whistle blows.

The thing is, just what percentage of all timing errors actually have an official seeing the exact time as the whistle blows?

I'd wager that the vast majority do not, most have the official looking after the whistle, and therefore lag time occurs with this look and time is corrected to the time the official saw on the clock at that look.

Further this lag time issue, probably gets misinterpreted by officials out there because many read into the rules and think they need to witness more than a second come off the clock before they can fix it.

All this aside does not change the fact that Nevada did not give us this critical piece of the puzzle in his play. Just because he said .6 was on there at the whistle does not mean that an official was looking at the clock at that whistle. Any look after the whistle means whatever time was on the clock can be put back on.