One day I hope it will be :)

No. The NBA and NCAA stop the clock after a made basket in the closing minute(s) of the game so that the team that's leading can't simply hold the ball OOB and let the last 4.9 seconds of the game elapse. They want to force the team to play that last 5 seconds.

Then why doesn't that rule only apply to the last 5 seconds instead of the whole last minute, Mr. Logic Person?

Um, b/c you can't run out the last 5 seconds of the game while you're still in the first minue of the game? Seems like pretty simple logic to me. :shrug:

We don't need to KNOW that 1 second ticked off. The comment very clearly states that the time it takes the official to look up at the clock is interpreted to be enough 'reaction' time. If the official looked up and saw the clock after seeing the timeout signal and saw 0.8, he/she should put 0.8 on the clock.

And you also can't run out the clock if you're in the first 55 seconds of the <b>last</b> minute of the game either.....

Which was my point. Now, Mr. Logic/WeaselBoy, again.....why should the rule apply to <b>ANY</b> other time during the game, rather than very specifically during the last 5 seconds of the game, if time isn't gonna run out during any other time?

Because if you want to use such a rule, you've got to pick some time at which the provision kicks in. Since it would probably be tough to administer only in the last 5 seconds, and would make the game too long if you used it through the entire game, you have to pick some other arbitrary time. The rulesmakers picked 1 minute.

Why should the mercy rule kick in at 30 points instead of 32? Same thing. Have to pick some arbitrary number and that one doesn't seem unreasonable. :double shrug:

Yabut, <b>you</b> said that the rule was <b>only</b> implemented to cover the last 5 seconds of a quarter. You said that. I heard ya. If so, then <b>why</b> would the rulesmakers have have to cover <b>any</b> other period of play other than that? They coulda said "This rule only applies to the last 5 seconds of each quarter".

I'm not giving up until it's time to pop a brownpop and watch the start of the first quarter.

Anybody but Seattle.....we'll never hear the end of it from Rocky....the little sh!t will be insufferable(much like you and the other Pats' fans were over the last few years).....

No, I didn't. I said "the last 5 seconds of the game". So there. Nyahhhh. I win. Go Seahawks.

Go Seahawks. [/B][/QUOTE]I kew it it, I knew it.....

It's some kinda national conspiracy funded by the NAATP(National Association for the Advancement of Tiny People....

It\'s true, it\'s true......

I\'m only rooting for \'em to make you miserable :D

Not true. If it were true, we would simply ALWAYS reset the clock to what the official saw when he looked at it. Two separate case plays wouldn\'t be necessary. For all we know, he didn\'t look at the clock until the horn sounded.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jan 22nd, 2006 at 03:45 PM]

What is being lost here is just how often are we looking at the clock as we or are partner blows the whistle?

I think most of us will routinely glance at the clock after every whistle, but really how often are we looking directly at the clock during the whistle?

I\'d say it would be extremely rare for an official to ever have definite knowledge of exactly 1 second of lag time running off, so in most cases we will be dealing with the sequence of whistle, then look and interpreted lag time with the time being put back up.

I\'d like to see the rules reflect the reality of the situation, instead of adding the confusion of 1 second of lag time is allowed, because too many officials may think that means a second always needs to come off the clock.

Well, I see this argument rears its ugly head again. Count me in the camp supporting putting .8 back on the clock. Also, count me in the camp wanting a specific rule and case example in the new NFHS rules to clear this up once and for all.