The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 01:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Care to support that by a rule?

Like I said, replace the 1.2 with 5 seconds and for whatever reason, there was never a count, you going to allow a team to lose a game because of a known timing error? I doubt it.
I don't like it, but it is the rule.

Unless you have definite knowledge of how much time should be put back, you can't put any back. And 1.2 is not the correct amount to put back becasue the clock should have started when the ball was rebounded.

Perhaps the time should be 0.8 or 0.9, but not 1.2. But, since you don't know, you can't put any back.

To put 1.2 back gives the rebounding team more time than they deserve. They would now get to advance the ball down the court with a throwin pass such that the clock would only start on the catch...possibly in a shooting position. If the clock had been properly started, the team would have been forced to make that pass with the clock running (or call a timeout if they had any left).

To put 1.2 back would allow a team an undeserved chance to win the game due to a timing error.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 01:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
I don't like it, but it is the rule.

Unless you have definite knowledge of how much time should be put back, you can't put any back. And 1.2 is not the correct amount to put back becasue the clock should have started when the ball was rebounded.

Perhaps the time should be 0.8 or 0.9, but not 1.2. But, since you don't know, you can't put any back.

To put 1.2 back gives the rebounding team more time than they deserve. They would now get to advance the ball down the court with a throwin pass such that the clock would only start on the catch...possibly in a shooting position. If the clock had been properly started, the team would have been forced to make that pass with the clock running (or call a timeout if they had any left).

To put 1.2 back would allow a team an undeserved chance to win the game due to a timing error.
Actually it's not the rule.

The rule has two parts...one, definite knowledge and two, counts MAY be used to aquire it.

We have definite knowledge of the time, 1.2, there just is not any rule support either way, because it does not specifically cover this situation.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 01:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
it most certainly does cover it

We have definite knowledge of how much time should have been on the clock when anyone touched it...1.2 seconds. A count may be used to determine time used. Did we have a count, not according to the original post. No count, no definite knowledge of time remaining, no way to put time back on the clock by rule. It sucks, but mistakes happen. We always say officials don't cost teams the game, they most likely missed a free throw, committed turnovers etc etc. This falls in the same category, it happens at a very inopportune time, but did this one mistake cost anyone the game....I doubt it, because right here right now, we do have a missed free throw.....
__________________
The officials lament, or the coaches excuses as it were: "I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was going to blame you"
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 02:15pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmathews
We have definite knowledge of how much time should have been on the clock when anyone touched it...1.2 seconds.
Yup, and if you put 1.2 seconds back on the clock, you have to go back to the point where the ball was with 1.2 seconds on the clock. And that's the point where the FT was about to be shot, not where the missed FT was rebounded.

You can argue it all day long but this particular play isn't definitively covered.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 02:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Actually it's not the rule.

The rule has two parts...one, definite knowledge and two, counts MAY be used to aquire it.

We have definite knowledge of the time, 1.2, there just is not any rule support either way, because it does not specifically cover this situation.
That is NOT definite knowledge of how much time should have elapsed or should be on the clock. That is only knowledge of how much time used to be on the clock. The only time you can put 1.2 on the clock is if the horn sounds before the clock should have even started. That is the only case where the ball became dead at a time where you could know how much time to put back. In these other cases, you don't have any knowledge of how much time should be on the clock other than the fact that it should be more than 0 and less than 1.2.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 02:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
That is NOT definite knowledge of how much time should have elapsed or should be on the clock. That is only knowledge of how much time used to be on the clock. The only time you can put 1.2 on the clock is if the horn sounds before the clock should have even started. That is the only case where the ball became dead at a time where you could know how much time to put back. In these other cases, you don't have any knowledge of how much time should be on the clock other than the fact that it should be more than 0 and less than 1.2.
I disagree.

You still haven't addressed my alternate version with 5 seconds instead of 1.2...what if the timer started it just before release and all 5 seconds ran off just as the ball is touched?

Even if you started a count in this situation, 1.2, is half an arm flick .4, .5, or .6 seconds? Is that really definite knowledge?

The problem is we need working officials revising the rules and making rule changes.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 02:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
I disagree.

You still haven't addressed my alternate version with 5 seconds instead of 1.2...what if the timer started it just before release and all 5 seconds ran off just as the ball is touched?

Even if you started a count in this situation, 1.2, is half an arm flick .4, .5, or .6 seconds? Is that really definite knowledge?

The problem is we need working officials revising the rules and making rule changes.
By rule, even if 5 seconds runs off there is no provision to put any time back up.
__________________
The officials lament, or the coaches excuses as it were: "I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was going to blame you"
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 03:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
I disagree.

You still haven't addressed my alternate version with 5 seconds instead of 1.2...what if the timer started it just before release and all 5 seconds ran off just as the ball is touched?
By rule, no, you don't have any authority to put 5 back on the clock if some time should have run off the clock but you don't know how much. You have to know how much time should have been on the clock to add anything back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Even if you started a count in this situation, 1.2, is half an arm flick .4, .5, or .6 seconds? Is that really definite knowledge?

The problem is we need working officials revising the rules and making rule changes.
All that said, what am I going to do in a real game if this happens? I'm not putting 1.2 (or 5) back on the clock. And, I'm not leaving it at 0. I'm going to do the right thing and I'm going to have a "count" that lets me do what should be done....put something on the clock that is "right".
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 05:41pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
I'm not putting 1.2 (or 5) back on the clock. And, I'm not leaving it at 0. I'm going to do the right thing and I'm going to have a "count" that lets me do what should be done....put something on the clock that is "right".
Camron, are you saying you would have a count going in the 1.2 situation that would tell you anything other than when the time was up?
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 06:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
Camron, are you saying you would have a count going in the 1.2 situation that would tell you anything other than when the time was up?
Yes.

Due to an extensive musical background where you must keep accurate time and also break beats into segments that can be as little as tenths of a second, I have a very good sense of time even down to parts of a second.

I'm going to just "know" how much of a second passed between the catch and the horn.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 07:01pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
Yes.

Due to an extensive musical background where you must keep accurate time and also break beats into segments that can be as little as tenths of a second, I have a very good sense of time even down to parts of a second.

I'm going to just "know" how much of a second passed between the catch and the horn.
WOW!

And you managed to type that with a straight face too.

Yer good......

Last edited by Jurassic Referee; Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 08:57pm.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 08:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
WOW!

And you managed to type that with a straight fact too.

Yer good......
Huh ????? You lost me on that one.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 08:58pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
Huh ????? You lost me on that one.
Typo revised.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 09:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
By rule, no, you don't have any authority to put 5 back on the clock if some time should have run off the clock but you don't know how much. You have to know how much time should have been on the clock to add anything back.
If only a couple of tenths should have run off, I'm putting 5 back up. I have full authority to do that. If not under 5-10, then under 2-3.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
All that said, what am I going to do in a real game if this happens? I'm not putting 1.2 (or 5) back on the clock. And, I'm not leaving it at 0. I'm going to do the right thing and I'm going to have a "count" that lets me do what should be done....put something on the clock that is "right".
So you are going to fabricate a time. Wonderful. That's surely the right thing to do.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 17, 2007, 09:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
So you are going to fabricate a time. Wonderful. That's surely the right thing to do.
If you have half a brain and you pay attention you can develop an intuitive feel for time. Especially if you keep a count going. But even if not.

That said...whether you change the clock or not you are "fabricating" something.

"I dunno, leave the clock where it is" is exactly the same as "err....let's put 5.2 seconds back up."

Think about it, I'm sure you can agree. Or get someone to explain it to you.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Timing error CLAY Basketball 1 Wed Nov 23, 2005 08:55am
Timing error--no sub? TriggerMN Basketball 3 Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:31am
Player Error or Referee Error??? BK Basketball 21 Fri Jan 16, 2004 01:04pm
Interesting timing question Cornellref Basketball 9 Thu Mar 20, 2003 04:46am
Timing - Timing - Timing Steve M Softball 16 Thu Jun 07, 2001 04:58pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:56pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1