A&M/Memphis finish

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

The officials need definite information as to how much time should be taken off, and when the whistle blew has got nothing to do with establishing that definite information. The actual time that elapsed between a legal touch in-bounds until the ball touched OOB is definite information.

But it is not the CORRECT information. The correct information is not the time that elapses between when the Memphis player touches the ball and when the ball is truly out of bounds. The correct information is the time that elapses between when the Memphis player touches the ball and when the official signaled to stop the clock either with his whistle or hand.

Section 5. Officials Use of Replay/Television Equipment
Art. 1. Officials may use official courtside replay equipment, videotape or television monitoring that is located on a designated courtside table (i.e., within approximately 3 to 12 feet of the playing court), when such equipment is available only in situations as follows:

f. A determination, based on the judgment of the official, that a timing
mistake has occurred in either starting or stopping the game clock.
After the ball is in play, such a mistake shall be corrected during the
first dead ball or during the next live ball but before the ball is touched
inbounds or out of bounds by a player. When the clock should have
been continuously running, the mistake shall be corrected before the
second live ball is touched inbounds or out of bounds by a player.


The fact that the point at which the official should end measured elapsed time is implied - it's when the official blows the whistle or signals for the game clock to be stopped. It's implied because the next paragraph implies it.

g. A determination of the correct time to be placed back on the game
clock when the referee blows the whistle, signals for the game clock
to be stopped, and in his/her judgment time has elapsed before the
game clock stopped.

Like I said, a different situation, but play (and elapsed time) stops on the whistle or signal, not when the ball goes out of bounds. The official must signal when the ball goes out of bounds or signal - no violation matters after the official. The fact that the clock did not start does not make the play following it any different. If a referee whistled and motioned for the clock to stop at 2.7 seconds, before a ball hit the OOB line at 2.0 seconds, then the clock would be stopped at 2.7 seconds - it's an official's mistake, and cannot be reviewed on the monitor. The fact that the timer also makes a mistake does not make this any different - measurement of time elapsed goes from signal to signal.

The whistle and signal matter. No violation itself stops the clock. A ball going OOB cannot stop the clock. Only a whistle/signal can. When the official whistled/signaled, the clock should have stopped had it been running - therefore the time that should have elapsed should be measured only until that point.

This is NOT and CANNOT be an inadvertent whistle. The ref had a call to make and he made it - he thought the ball was out of bounds early, and whistled the clock dead then. It makes no difference when measuring the time elapsed that the ball didn't truly go out of bounds for another however many tenths of a second (up to .5 maybe?)!!

The amount of time used, by rule, is the time lapsed from the ball being legally touched in-bounds by the Memphis player until the ball then touches something-anything-out of bounds.

NO! It's till the whistle. If it's early, well tough luck for Memphis, but it's till the whistle! The points at which the whistle blew and when the ball touched anything-out-of-bounds are different. There is no rule that says replay can be used to determine when the ball truly touched something out of bounds. Most times a ball going OOB and a ref's whistle are at approximately the same point - in this case, it obviously was not.

Not that any of this probably mattered in the game, it was probably a negligible less than .5 second difference... but this is an official's forum and this mistake could be made to an even greater degree where it really makes a 2 second or more difference.

Great. Now would you please answer the questions also in my post directly preceding this one?

How would you handle the play under NCAA rules? Throw-in by A&M..touched by Memphis....whistle before the ball touched OOB....Memphis has the arrow.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Great. Now would you please answer the questions also in my post directly above.

How would you handle the play under NCAA rules?

Gee, that was my question to you last night.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Coach Jinx

HOW do you know for sure it didn't start.

I can't be certain, but I'm willing to bet that the timer knew how to talk.

Also, having timed for many years, I can tell you it's damn near impossible to start and stop a clock without at least 0.1 coming off of it.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Um, where may I confirm that a whistle had actually blown and the clock was dead?

I don't know. I'm not asking you to. As I said, I didn't see the play, and I haven't watched it on youtube. I'm simply asking you to give a rules reference for your claim earlier in this thread that a an accidental whistle wouldn't matter in the play in question because the clock never started. I am saying that a whistle would matter because it would cause the ball to become dead.

If you're claiming that a whistle never sounded, fine. But that still doesn't justify your earlier comment that the whistle wouldn't have mattered if it had sounded. You seem to have an aversion to providing a rules citation to back up that statement.

And again, and for the last time, I couldn't care less about how to put the ball back in play after the accidental whistle. That's simply an irrelevant distraction from the actual issue under discussion.

I've made my point as well as I can make it. So I'm done with this thread until/unless somebody can provide a reasonable answer to my question. Assuming there was a whistle before the ball actually touched out of bounds, by what rule can you take time off the clock that includes time after the ball was dead? Very simple question, really. And I think we all know the answer.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

The fact that the point at which the official should end measured elapsed time is implied - it's when the official blows the whistle or signals for the game clock to be stopped. It's implied because the next paragraph implies it.

g. A determination of the correct time to be placed back on the game
clock when the referee blows the whistle, signals for the game clock
to be stopped, and in his/her judgment time has elapsed before the
game clock stopped.

Like I said, a different situation...

I don't agree that this paragraph implies what you're saying. I think you are inferring. The situations are different enough that I don't think this is a fair comparison.

I just don't see what's so hard about assuming that these guys got it right, even though we don't understand it.

[jkjenning]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I just don't see what's so hard about assuming that these guys got it right, even though we don't understand it.

Because understanding rules-based questions is the primary motivation for frequenting this forum. If by the rules, their ruling was correct, then it should have a direct explanation - obviously it's not clear and it's easy to conceive that if they had modified the time from 3.1 to 2.6 the majority concensus could easily be that their decision was correct.

I thought that, except for the audible whistle I'm convinced I hear, Jurrasic Referee had a good point somewhere a few pages back in which he points out the Trail may have been identifying who last touched the ball... who knows? were they using that mechanic "all game long" before killing the clock? I doubt it, but whatever. The point is that this is not a witch-hunt but a rule-hunt and the discussion is valid.

[wildcatter]

I'm starting to come around more and more after you ask the question "how would you have handled it?" after watching the replay again. I could swear I could hear a whistle before the ball went OOB on the youtube replay but: 1) youtube quality stinks, 2) that whistle could have been some other noise (squeaking of shoes, whatever), 3) there could easily be a slight delay between audio/video, 4) i don't believe the officials can listen to audio on replay equipment (can they?)

But to answer the questions, assuming there WAS a whistle/signal, and it could be seen clearly before the ball went OOB:

1) Is that an IW?

No, the definition of the IW is in the book and is clear as follows:

Art. 1. An inadvertent whistle occurs anytime an official blows the whistle as an oversight and does not have a call to make.

The ref had a call to make, and made it. It would make sense to believe he thought the ball was OOB when it bounced off the Memphis player. This call cannot be reviewed, and shouldn't matter that the replays showed otherwise.

2) If it isn't an IW, then what is it?

The whistle was for an OOB violation. Call it a blown call, but it should have stopped the clock.

3) How do you handle this play if an A&M player was the last player to legally touch the ball in-bounds on the throw-in?

Assuming we just switched the Memphis player's jersey to A&M and everything else was exactly the same - ball goes to Memphis. Check the monitor to see how much time elapsed between the touch and signal/whistle.

4) How do you handle this play if a Memphis player was the last player to legally touch the ball in-bounds on the throw-in?

Again, much the same as before, ball goes to A&M - Check the monitor to see how much time elapsed between the touch and signal/whistle.

5) Who gets the ball in both #3 and #4 above if (a)Memphis has the arrow, or (b) A&M has the arrow.

I don't believe the arrow would matter here - there is no IW (unless there is another reason that it should, which I could easily be missing)

Had the time difference been much larger between the point at which the whistle was blown and the ball actually went OOB AND there was an even 1% chance that anyone could have gotten to the ball between the whistle and point at which the ball went OOB AND had the whistle/signal been clear - I think this would have mattered, and I would have handled it differently. But I believe now that most on this thread are right - this is making a big fuss about nothing. In this situation, the officials did what I would have done (except that I had 2 days to think about it) - in general, this would not the right thing by NCAA rules as Scrapper says, the point should be measured til when the official signals - but I don't know if that's possible in this case... no whistle could be heard by the officials on their replay system, and by the time the official signals, the ball is truly OOB. I think in our youtube replay we can hear the official whistle.

So basically, I just showed myself that when you said originally, "the officials did the right thing," that was right (AND this was the most fair outcome, as it rectified the official's mistake, through some form of not having perfect information) and I just wasted a lot of words saying that.

[wildcatter]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I don't agree that this paragraph implies what you're saying. I think you are inferring. The situations are different enough that I don't think this is a fair comparison.

I just don't see what's so hard about assuming that these guys got it right, even though we don't understand it.

You may be right - it's just trying to make a simple point.

You're saying if an official misses a call by blowing his whistle early, the time elapsed shouldn't be measured to the point where his whistle is blown - it should end at some later point as if the whistle was never blown.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

You may be right - it's just trying to make a simple point.

You're saying if an official misses a call by blowing his whistle early, the time elapsed shouldn't be measured to the point where his whistle is blown - it should end at some later point as if the whistle was never blown.

No. The case you quote is when the clock is started properly and then doesn't stop when the whistle is blown. In that case the replay is used to determine when the whistle was blown, so that the clock can be set to that point.

I'm saying that the case under consideration is different since the clock never started in the first place. So to say that the case you quoted implies that replay should be used to determine when the whistle blew doesn't seem to me like a correct interpretation.

I just think that when the whistle blew as opposed to when the ball hit something oob isn't really an important distinction. The ref blew the whistle for the oob violation, and was a little quick on it. The tape showed that the ball did indeed go oob, and that the time between when the ball was touched legally inbounds, and when the ball gained oob status was 1.1 seconds. I dont understand why that's so hard to grasp. (I;m not dirrecting these comments to you, wildcatter, but to others who seem to think they know better than 4 of the top officials in the country).

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by jkjenning

Because understanding rules-based questions is the primary motivation for frequenting this forum. If by the rules, their ruling was correct, then it should have a direct explanation - obviously it's not clear and it's easy to conceive that if they had modified the time from 3.1 to 2.6 the majority concensus could easily be that their decision was correct.

I thought that, except for the audible whistle I'm convinced I hear, Jurrasic Referee had a good point somewhere a few pages back in which he points out the Trail may have been identifying who last touched the ball... who knows? were they using that mechanic "all game long" before killing the clock? I doubt it, but whatever. The point is that this is not a witch-hunt but a rule-hunt and the discussion is valid.

I expect the rule that you're looking for is some sort of official interpretation of how to handle these sorts of situations that isn't necessarily obvious to us from our reading of the book. I mean look at NFHS case 10.1.8. Would you automatically have figured that was how to handle that rule?

I'm saying even though we can't find anything that says, "When the clock doesn't start you just time the play until the ball goes out of bounds regardless of the whistle" that doen'st mean they aren't going by the rules. It just means that we aren't as up on the NCAA rules and interps and fiats and dicta as they are.

Why do they owe us an official explanation? They're not even issuing explanations when it would protect their reputation such as in last night's travel/no travel problem. They have in effect issued an explanation by ruling as they did. Talking with their feet, so to speak.

[wildcatter]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I just think that when the whistle blew as opposed to when the ball hit something oob isn't really an important distinction. The ref blew the whistle for the oob violation, and was a little quick on it. The tape showed that the ball did indeed go oob, and that the time between when the ball was touched legally inbounds, and when the ball gained oob status was 1.1 seconds. I dont understand why that's so hard to grasp. (I;m not dirrecting these comments to you, wildcatter, but to others who seem to think they know better than 4 of the top officials in the country).

I see what you're saying - I do believe it IS an important distinction - normally. The ref was early on the whistle because he thought the ball was OOB earlier - whether or not this is this was correct should not matter on replay. It cannot be reviewed. The point at which the play should be stopped is when the official signaled/whistled it to be stopped. If he made a mistake, so be it. Just because there was a timing error does not mean that whistles do not matter.

Again, had the play been a ref whistling that a ball went OOB at 6.0 seconds, and it really went OOB at 3.0 seconds - well tough luck, the ref whistled it dead at 6.0 seconds. That's when the clock should stop - in general, time after that is a dead ball. No replay that shows differently should matter. The fact that the clock never started or there was a timing error does not affect the call on the court. The officials corrected the clock after the play is over - the play was over when he whistled it dead when it right after it first bounced and before it was truly OOB.

That being said, like I said in the last post, the officials handled it great in this case, considering there was a timing error. They could not tell when the whistle was (from the youtube clip, before the signal) - so they went with the signal/when the ball was OOB (which was roughly the same point).

I am constantly surprised how often officials get it correct within the last minute of a game on plays with very little time to work - I know working much lower-pressure games (not even high school or junior high!) that I would have probably screwed it up. What is even more impressive is that fans/announcers/former-players/players/coaches/refs watching the game have the benefit of multiple replays, multiple angles, and tons of extra time, and still somehow come up with the incorrect call.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

The ref was early on the whistle because he thought the ball was OOB earlier - whether or not this is this was correct should not matter on replay.

Where may I read that this is a true statement and not just conjecture?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

I see what you're saying - I do believe it IS an important distinction - normally. The ref was early on the whistle because he thought the ball was OOB earlier - whether or not this is this was correct should not matter on replay. It cannot be reviewed. The point at which the play should be stopped is when the official signaled/whistled it to be stopped. If he made a mistake, so be it. Just because there was a timing error does not mean that whistles do not matter.

So you're thinking the whistle blew when trail pointed at the ball as it bounced on the floor?

Ah, I thought we'd decided that the trail was pointing at the player to indicate a tip. I thought the whistle came as the ball was past the plane of the oob, but hadn't yet touched the table person.

Hmmm, where's that video clip again? I can't find it!!

[wildcatter]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Where may I read that this is a true statement and not just conjecture?

You can't! Read my post. You're right.

[JRutledge]

Wildcatter,

It is clear to me you are assuming there was an IW when there clearly was not. The official showed a tip to indicate that the ball was touched so the ball would be put out of bounds near the sideline and not the end line. Sorry, I am with JR; I think most of your post is conjecture.

Peace