Sell this one!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by blindzebra

And what was the exact time on the clock then after the official looked if he wasn't looking at the clock when he blew his whistle with 0.6 seconds left? Where can I find that information? Don't you need to have that exact information to put any time at all back on the clock?

There sureasheck can't still be O.6 seconds on the clock after he looks, no matter what. That look has to take some time- and if you don't know exactly how much time that look took, you can't put any "looking" time back on the clock.

"Look took"? [/B]

It's getting late and I'm tired, so this is my final attempt to knock a hole in that brick wall known as JR.

In Nevada's play we know by description that .6 seconds was on the clock when the whistle occurred, correct?

We also know that by rule lag time is interpreted as the interval between whistle and look at the clock if the official is not looking at the clock at the time of the whistle, correct?

What we don't know is were the officials in this play looking at the clock during the whistle, if they looked after the whistle, heck they might not have looked at all and Nevada just pulled the .6 out of his rear end, correct?

Now, for the sake of argument, let's say they were not looking at the clock at the whistle, but glanced right after and .3 seconds were on the clock and then it ran off.

Game over or A's ball with .3 on the clock? [/B][/QUOTE]A's ball with .3 on the clock.

But....if you don't have exact knowledge that .3 is the correct time when you looked, or what the exact time showing on the clock is after you look at it as is the case of the play we're discussing, you can't put any time back on the clock.

That's my point- and the rules. You can put .3 seconds back on the clock if you know that .3 seconds was on the clock when you looked at it. If you don't know what the actual time was on the clock though because you didn't see anything before the clock hit 00.0, then you can't put any time back on. The rules sez that. You're trying to justify your original argument by using circumstances that aren't relevant or pertinent.