The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 16, 2005, 10:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,105
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
Chuck,
Why the two different rulings? What is the difference between "in his/her judgment" and "has definite knowledge"?
The difference is to cover both the case when the official is looking at the clock when the whistle blows and also the case when the official is not looking at the clock when the whistle blows.

In the first ruling, the official is allowed to use his/her judgment about whether or not the clock ran for less than a second. If you're not looking at the clock as the whistle blows (as JR has pointed out in the other thread), you can't know definitely how much time ran off. So even if you don't know for sure how much time came off, you can still put back the time you saw. At least, that's what it sounds like to me.

In the second ruling, the official has definite knowledge, which means that s/he was looking at the clock when the whistle sounded.

The two rulings remove the absurd distinction created by the FED's lag time provision. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:56am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1