Duke/Clemson timing error

[IREFU2]

Thanks for the clarification! Have you ever used this device? I believe in VA it is used in the State Campionships.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Thanks for the clarification! Have you ever used this device? I believe in VA it is used in the State Campionships.

I have used this system about 4 times in my career. I work in a conference that had two teams that had the device for their home games.

Peace

[tmp44]

For those of you that have seen the play/saw the game:

I understand that more than .6 seconds elapsed -- that seems to be clear. But, is there anyway that the only definite knowledge that the officials had was .6 seconds? Regardless of everyone guestimating that it took 2.5 seconds to get the shot off, what actions, from what you guys saw, would justify them putting 4.4 back up?

Is it possible that, since there was no definite knowledge, it could have been .3 + .3, that is, reaction time to start, plus reaction time to stop, that led them to take .6 off?

[mjbofficial]

Clemson got hosed. There was plenty of time for all of the appropriate parties to put a fair amount of time back on, but 4.4 seconds was obviously too much.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by mjbofficial

Clemson got hosed. There was plenty of time for all of the appropriate parties to put a fair amount of time back on, but 4.4 seconds was obviously too much.

How would you have determined the correct amount of time to put on the clock?

As far as why the officials ran 0.6 off the clock, I'm guessing, during the video review, that's the amount of time they saw elapse off the game clock between the time the clock finally started and when the basketball went through the basket. Meaning, the clock was originally at 5.0, it didn't start until the ball was about to go through the hoop, the ball passed through the hoop, the clock read 4.4, then it continued to run down to 1.8 when the mistake was finally noticed. In this case, the only definite knowledge the officials would have had was the 0.6 seconds.

[tmp44]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

As far as why the officials ran 0.6 off the clock, I'm guessing that's the amount of time they saw run off the clock between the time the clock finally started and when the basketball went through the basket. Meaning, the clock was originally at 5.0, it didn't start until the ball was about to go through the hoop, the ball ball passed through the hoop, the clock read 4.4, then it continued to run down to 1.8 when the mistake was finally noticed. In this case, the only definite knowledge the officials would have had was the 0.6 seconds.

That makes sense. Under the definite knowledge rule, there is no way the officials could definitely determine elapsed time while the ball is in the air without some sort of on court count, etc. The only thing they can do is put the time they know back up (or off in this case). If BadNewsRef's interpretation of what happened is correct, then I don't see any fault on the officials' part, however unfortunate that may be for Clemson, in this game.

[grunewar]

Let me look into my crystal ball, the call went in Duke's favor. Was I right?

At Duke? Shocked I am that you would say such a thing!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Let me look into my crystal ball, the call went in Duke's favor. Was I right?

At Duke? Shocked I am that you would say such a thing!

The call didn't go anybody's way. There was a timing error and the officials rectified the error as best they could within the framework of the rulebook.

Timing errors don't get officials suspended, going outside the confines of the rulebook to correct those errors is what gets them in trouble.

ps: FYI, I've always hated Duke

[Jimgolf]

Why didn't they check the monitor?

[nakemiin]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The call didn't go anybody's way. There was a timing error and the officials rectified the error as best they could within the framework of the rulebook.

Timing errors don't get officials suspended, going outside the confines of the rulebook to correct those errors is what gets them in trouble.

ps: FYI, I've always hated Duke

BadNewsRef --

It's refreshing when someone admits their bias or prejudice. Honesty is best policy -- and while I disagree with you I applaud your candor.l

[nakemiin]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Let me look into my crystal ball, the call went in Duke's favor. Was I right?

At Duke? Shocked I am that you would say such a thing!

This is precisely the type of in-depth, thoughtful analysis that in the end demeans the integrity of the ACC referees and officials.

It sounds good to Duke-haters, but is patently untrue. If there is bias among officials one could equally argue that they are anti-Duke because of their success over the years. ...or anti-UNC for that matter. Come on, be reasonable.

[nakemiin]

I've read this thread (or at least most of it), and frankly while I think the discussion has been pertinent to the specific event, and that the comments for the most part of rationale and considered, I think we are missing the salient point.

The game was neither won nor lost on this single refereeing error -- but rather because of many events during the game. The game is not a 4.4 second game, but a 40 minute game. And thoroughout those 40 minutes numerous calls are made by the referees -- some good, some bad, some favoring one team, some favoring the other. In the Duke-Clemson game I saw at least 5 calls that were (in my opinion, but operating under an understanding of the rules) questionable at best, outright wrong at worst. One of the most egregious was a blocking foul on Duke, which resulted in a 3point play for Clemson. Re-looking at the tape of the game it was clearly a bad call -- giving Clemson 3 unwarranted points.

Where's the outrage over that call? Had it been called correctly the issue of the time at the end of the game would have been moot.

Unfortunately basketball is a fast game, referees are human, and some calls require split second judgment. Let's not dissect any single mistake by the officials, but rather emphasize the pattern of errors by specific individuals and then get them out of the game. But done blame Duke -- they played by the rules, lived with the vagaries of the refs and (this time) were fortunate to win.

...and in the end it's just a game -- and a great one at that, even with all its problems.

jbc

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by nakemiin

The game was neither won nor lost on this single refereeing error -- but rather because of many events during the game. The game is not a 4.4 second game, but a 40 minute game.

JBC, welcome to the forum. Glad you've joined us.

I don't think anybody here is trying to pin the outcome of the game on the officials. Nobody thinks that the refs cost Clemson the game. But we are trying to figure out the best way to handle this bad situation and what to do if something similar should ever happen to us.

Even if the officials had taken more time off the clock, Duke still might've scored by running a different play. The real question is what we are supposed to do when the clock doesn't start properly.

[nakemiin]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

JBC, welcome to the forum. Glad you've joined us.

I don't think anybody here is trying to pin the outcome of the game on the officials. Nobody thinks that the refs cost Clemson the game. But we are trying to figure out the best way to handle this bad situation and what to do if something similar should ever happen to us.

Even if the officials had taken more time off the clock, Duke still might've scored by running a different play. The real question is what we are supposed to do when the clock doesn't start properly.

This is precisely the point one of the Sports Center commentators made -- you are absolutely right.

Here's a thought -- but don't laugh please.

It seems to me that it would feasible, at least for portions of the game, to have the timing started and stopped automatically. I haven't thought this through entirely but here goes.

Instrument the ball with an identification device, the basket with a "reader", and the end and sidelines with "readers" -- so that when the ball goes through the hoop the clock stops, when it is tossed in across the end line it starts - automatically. When it goes out on the sidelines it similarly stops, and starts automatically when inbounded. Referees would have a device (with whistle?) to stop the clock during penalties, timeouts, etc. You could have a redundant manual system at the scorers table, and when there is a discrepancy between the automatic and manual system of some specified amount (1/2 sec, 1 sec, e.g.) it would trigger a review at that very moment.

Given the capability we have to monitor tennis matches (challenge system electronics) and football (yellow, blue, red lines) this is certainly technically possible. I'm sure I haven't thought about everything, but who knows it might be doable.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by nakemiin

The game was neither won nor lost on this single refereeing error -- but rather because of many events during the game. The game is not a 4.4 second game, but a 40 minute game.
jbc

You are 100% right, but a team cannot recover from a (officiating) mistake at the end of a game. Hopefully, that is part of your pre-game.