Late:

"Working" the night shift, again, and had some time to muddle through all this.

I actually changed my mind, as to how I would administer this sitch, as I was reading the different posts. No, Nevada, I am not giving the ball back to Team B.

Initially, I thought I would do as JR and others have suggested...simply put the correct time on the clock and start back at the endline.

But, as some posters have stated...and adding some of my own thoughts...

1) The ball was live as it was rolling
2) Team B chose to NOT play defense or press
3) The ball made it to a different place than where it started. (some player propelled it...the ball didn't roll on it's own)
4) If the timer had started the clock CORRECTLY, wouldn't the ball have been at the NEW SPOT (close to the division line) with the SAME time that should have been on the clock if it had not started incorrectly? (Sort of a TIME and DISTANCE thing...oh wait! a different thread):D
5) No specific rule...use judgement...at least one State rule interpreter with FED ties says so.

That's about all that you can do, Dude, when a play like this isn't definitively covered.

Nevada
Okay having reread your rule cites, I see were you come up with the AP to reset play if you blew the whistle without possession / team control it does make some sense as to the determination that you came to.
I still do not agree with it - I think it a terrible outcome for the offense committed by the timer - but I find nothing that proves you wrong in the NFHS rules based blowing the ball dead without possession / team control being established.

That is the problem.

The whistle should not have been blown until possession/team control had been established,(this would not matter in NCAA as there is team control on the throw in), once team control is established, the whistle is blown, the timers mistake is rectified by resetting the clock or taking time off and the ball is put inbounds nearest the spot where the whistle blew. Because there is Team control the AP is out of the question.

Here is why I disagree with that method....

Team A will get the ball near mid-court in a players hands with the clock stopped with an opportunity to throw the ball in a new direction with increased speed. That is an opportunity they don't have with the ball rolling down the court. Again, the difference is that, while the ball may be at the division line in both cases, team A gets the ball in a much better situation with a new throwin at mid-court with the clock stopped and no time removed.

Anytime the whistle is blown before the throwin is completed (and there is no violation or foul), the new throwin spot will be the old throwin spot.

I posted exactly the same thing ages ago and the thread keeps on going. I just know that's what I would do and would be backed by my assignors because I've seen the situation and had the situation and that's always been the right way according to those I work for and want to work for.

Ok, we pretty much agree on this one. I've said numerous times that the current NFHS rules cover this poorly, and that if one were to follow the letter of the law in this case it could be grossly unfair. However, that consideration doesn't change what the actual rule is, which is what I have gone to great lengths to point out during this thread. Sadly, the applicable NFHS rule seems to be 6-4-3e, which says to go to the AP arrow.

You add a nice thought about the NCAA that since there is team control during the throw-in, this isn't a problem. That is one way that the NFHS could go to fix this. Perhaps they will make that change. It has been suggested for the past couple of years, since the NCAA did it.

However, you are incorrect under NCAA rules when you say that "the ball is put inbounds nearest the spot" following the stoppage. The NCAA released a clarification recently that said that the game resumes with a new throw-in by the same team from the original throw-in location.

The only thing that's sad is your screwy interpretation. You're Old School with a rule book.:rolleyes:

JR:

1) Boy are you up early.

2) NevadaRef sites the correct rule. I agree that it is not the best way to handle the situation, that is why I stated in my earlier post, that since the only thing that is happening is a Timer's error is to what until the throw-in is over and then correct the clock.

MTD, Sr.

Well, Mark, I'd really, really like to be there when you and Nevada call that one. I can pretty much predict what's gonna happen.

State championship game. Team A has the ball OOB on it's endline with 5 seconds to go in the game, down 1. A1 rolls the ball up court. Just <b>before</b> it's touched, MTD Sr. blows his whistle. The R, Nevada, says we now have to go to the arrow. Whoopsie....team B has the arrow. Nevada/Mtd. Sr. now give team B the ball for a throw-in.

I can almost guarantee that you'll have to now unload the team A head coach via the 2-"T" route. Maybe an A assistant coach or two also, seeing that there's no way that they can win the game now anyway. I mean, why should the coach be mad? They had a throw-in, never finished the throw-in, never violated or did anything wrong, but you're giving the <b>other</b> team the ball. Well, I certainly hope that game management has provided a lot of security also because they're sureasheck gonna need it for the team A fanboys.

The good thing though is that you both can now claim that you were a part of history in your <b>last</b> game, because that game will <b>never</b> be forgotten.

I've seen some ridiculous interpretations made on this forum over the years, but I really think that this one might be the topper. I give it 5 Old Schools.

JR:

Go back and read my first post. I am not going to sound my whistle until A2 picks up the ball. And then I am going to correct the clock by taking one second off the clock and then give the ball to Team A nearest the spot that
A2 picked up the ball.

MTD, Sr.

Mark, go back and read Nevada's post. He's saying that he'll go with the arrow if the whistle is blown <b>BEFORE</b> the ball is touched. Iow, without anyone touching the ball in-bounds on that throw-in, he's going to give the defense the ball if they've got the arrow.That's what you agreed with.

JR:

I agreed that NevadeRef quoted the correct rules reference if one makes the ball dead before the throw-in ended. I am sorry if I didn't make myself more clear.

MTD, Sr.

And I'll stick with my assessment that Nevada and your interpretation might be the goofiest and most ridiculous one ever made on this forum. It's Old Schoolian in scope.

JR:

I have not had any PM's with NevadaRef about this play but I think that all of us will agree on the following items:

1) The rules state that Team A has five (5) seconds to release the ball during the throw-in such that it then crosses the throw-in boundary and is subsequently touched by another player on the court either inbounds or out-of-bounds. The rules allow for Team A to release the ball such that it rules up the court in the manner that Team A was attempting in the situation at the start of this thread.

2) When the game officials, i.e., court officials or table officials, make a mistake it is the responsibility of the court officials to make sure that neither team is put at a disadvantage because of the officials' mistake.

3) Team A had complied with the first part of the throw-in rules. It had released the ball on a throw-in such that it then crossed the throw-in boundaryl The throw-in does not end until one of two things happen: (1) The ball is touched by another player on the court either inbounds or out-of-bounds; or (2) The ball went out-of-bounds without being touched by a player on the court either inbounds or out-of-bounds.

3) At some point during Team A's throw-in the Timer incorrectly started the clock too soon. The Timer's mistake does not cause the ball to become dead.

4) The question that was posed was that if the court officials cause the ball to become dead before the throw-in ends, how is the ball put back into play after the clock is corrected.

5) NFHS R6-S4-A3e states: Alternating-possession throw-ins hsall be from the out-of-bounds spot nearest to where the ball was located. An alternating-possession Throw-in shall result when: The ball becomes dead when neither team is in conrrol and no goal, infraction nor end of quarter/extra period is involved.

6) Lets forget that this play actually happened and treat it as a question on a rules examination. Bob Jenkins in his very first post in this thread (Mar. 21/Wed.(09:32am, 2007) said: "Inadvertant whistle with no team in control. Go to the arrow." I do not agree that this was an inadvertant whistle, but going to the AP Arrow is correct per NFHS R6-S4-A3e.

7) Lets go back to the real world now. What is the best way to handle this situation? Do not make the ball dead until after the ball one of the following things has happened after the throw-in has ended: (1) A player from either Team A or Team B has established player control; (2) Team A has committed a throw-in violation; or (3) The throw-in has ended and the ball as then gone out-of-bounds with neither team in control of the ball. I am sure that we can all think of a few other situation to add to the three that I just mentioned, but now the officials can correct the clock and restart play.

8) I agree that if the officials make the ball dead before the throw-in ends, applying NFHS R4-S4-A3e could put Team A at a disadvantage even if the AP Arrow favors Team A. That is it is so important for the officials to have game awareness. I can understand the pressure of a state championship game with players and coaches screaming at the officials that the clock is running when it is not supposed to be running, but that is game awareness is required.

9) If the officials stop the game before the throw-in ends and wants to give the ball back to Team A when the AP Arrow favors Team B and B-HC is saying in the conference among the court officials and head coaches that his team should get the ball because of NFHS NFHS R4-S4-A3e, how do the court officials expain their decision to give the ball back to Team A.

10) I guess, my advice is to not let oneself get into the position. I am not going to stop play until after the throw-in ends.

JR, I understand your position and I think that we agree that the rule as written is not good for the situation is this thread.

Maybe we should be working to get the NFHS rule more in line with the NCAA rule.

MTD, Sr.

Um, no, Mark, I completely <b>disagree</b> with both you and the Emperor of Illogic that the rule applies in the first place. You're both trying to apply a rule that's got nothing to do with play being discussed imo. Giving the other team the ball on a throw-in that was never completed because of a timing error might just be the dumbest interpretation ever made on this forum. Ever. It's just completely ridiculous.

Believe me, we ain't ever gonna agree on this one.

WRONG! As you usually are when you get into this crabby, "no-one-can-tell-me-anything" mood. Otherwise, you're normally quite good.

I see the problem. You don't. If the thrower was still holding the ball OOB when the clock started, and the whistle then went off before the ball even left the thrower's hands, you'd still give it to the other team if they had the arrow under your goofy interpretation.

Completely freaking ridiculous!

Touche'<! verbage>

That's true, but it's not MY interpretation. That is the way the rules currently read. I agree that result is ridiculous.

However, what is even more ridiculous is YOU stating that, but failing to cite some other rule which governs that situation. You can't do it because you know that there isn't another one that applies. You could only point to 2-3.

This is a clear gap in the NFHS rules and should be fixed.

JR:

By rule, yes. Am I going to by rule? No. Why? Easy, about five to seven years ago (maybe more), the NFHS change way how the game was to be restarted after a correctable error with regard to unawarded free throws. Before this rule change, i.e., if A1 was to receive free throws for a common foul by B1 and instead Team A was awarded a throw-in and the correctable error was discovered during the allowabe time limit, the free three would be awarded as a Point-of-Interuption. That meant if the correctable error was discovered while the ball was live, say, just after Team A had inbounded the ball, A1 would be awarded his free throws and then Team A would get the ball for a throw-in. That also meant if the correctable error was discovered while a player for Team A was in possession of the ball for the throw-in that had been awarded for B1's common foul inplace of the unawarded free throw for B1's foul, Team A should get the ball again for a throw-in after A1 had shot his free throws. BUT, I do not know of any official, including me that would handle a correctable error that was discovered while a player for Team A was in possession of the ball for the throw-in.

Once again, the key here is game awareness by the officials.

MTD, Sr.

This is a direct quote from the Big sky conference in a press release
Posted 1/22/2007 5:13 PM ET
HELENA, Mont. (AP) — The Big Sky Conference has suspended three women's basketball officials for a wrong call during the Montana State-Idaho State game in Pocatello, Idaho on Saturday.
After Idaho State had begun bringing the ball up court following the made three-pointer, the officials stopped play because both the official game clock and shot clock had malfunctioned. The officiating crew nullified MSU's three-point basket and in essence, the officials ignored all play that occurred after the throw-in by MSU following the time out. The officials also failed to use information provided to them when determining how much time should be put on the clock, the league said.

"As a league, we are very supportive of our officials and we defer to them for judgment calls," said Big Sky Conference Commissioner Doug Fullerton. "But on an application of a rule, with three officials on the floor, we expect them to get it right. And, in light of the recent NCAA bulletin, which specifically addresses 'do-overs', these misapplications cannot be ignored or tolerated."

According to the rules, a shot clock malfunction problem has to be corrected within the shot clock period in which it occurred. However, in this case, a new shot clock period had begun when the throw-in by ISU took place and it was too late to cancel the basket.

Concerning the game clock, the rules state that a game clock malfunction must be corrected in the half or period in which it occurred. So, the officials could have corrected the time at any point within the period.

The officials needed to determine the correct time to be placed on both clocks based on those rules and resume play at the point of interruption, which is where the ball was when the officials stopped play. When an official has definite information relative to the malfunction problem and the time involved, they are permitted to correct the problem, but they are not permitted to ignore play that has occurred and start over, the league said.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

However, you are incorrect under NCAA rules when you say that "the ball is put inbounds nearest the spot" following the stoppage. The NCAA released a clarification recently that said that the game resumes with a new throw-in by the same team from the original throw-in location.


Nevada you are incorrect
based on this years 2/21/07 NCAA Rules Interpretations and Case Plays
Play AR 120 Ruling Says " ... After a Conclusion has been reached, the referee shall put the determined time on the game clock play shall be resumed at the point where the ball was located when play stopped for the timers mistake. ..."
https://www.eofficials.com/controlpa...?ContentID=11#

Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying in this paragraph. It seemed to me that you were making the case that not only would the ball be put back in play at the POI (nearest OOB spot to the location of the ball) in the situation in which the inbounds player has already touched the ball when the whistle is blown, but because the NCAA has team control during a throw-in that the same location would apply even if the whistle was sounded PRIOR to the inbounds player touching the ball.

That question has been asked and the NCAA has responded that it is not the same and clarified that the original throw-in spot is the proper location from which to continue the game. Therefore, I was trying to tell you that if the inbounds player hasn't yet touched the ball, the throw-in location for the POI returns to the original throw-in spot, which could be back on the end line.

Please notice that this is different from the two examples that you just cited. In both of those examples the inbounds player has already touched the ball. I agree with you that the ball location is the proper POI in those cases.

I'll do some research and see if I can find the clarification for the case in which the inbounds player has NOT yet touched the ball.

It seems that we misunderstood what each other was saying.