Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mwanr1
Yes - I agree that the horn ends the game. But what if the officials know that the horn is going to have a split second delay and in order to ensure that the shot is released in time, one of the officials must keep an eye on both clock and shooter. Given we have definite knowledge that the clock will delay, we need to modify our officiating to suit the scenario. That's why we have that new rule - lag time elmiated (5-10-1). ALthough this is related more to adding time back to the clock, but "when an official has definite knowledge relative to the time involved, he/she should have the ability to put the correct time on the game clock. I beleive if we have knowledge that the time is expired, we have the power to wave off the last second shot attempt too.
|
The horn does not have to be simultaneous with the clock. It has become more and more the case with clocks with tenths of a second on them, but even then there are situations where that are still not the case. The speed of light and sound also travels at different velocities which could affect your decision if you rely some much on what the clock says. Depending on the gym you are in, it is very possible that there is going to be a delay in one from the other. If the NF and NCAA want to change the rule, I might go along with you. But the horn ends the game, not what the clock reads.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mwanr1
It is also true that while watching the shooter, it is difficult to monitor the game clock. But we need to try our best and call what the game fairly. In terms of "missing something", the 2-person game stinks as the game can never be called perfectly. Think of a fast break scenario. The new Trail hustles down the court and often run past 2 or 4 players to trail the play. What if those 4 players started fighting? Mechanically, we are supposed to "box-in the players" but since the "T" has to hustle down the court and officiate that play, we are opening up the opp. for the players to assult each other. What i'm getting across is the 2 person game is more difficult to officiate. But we will need to try our best to officiate the game even if it requires us to call and/or see the game differently to get the play right.
|
My priority is the play and the players, not the clock. So you can say we can watch the clock and the player, but I have yet to find that easy. The only time it is easier to do both on some levels is if you are working in a college gym where the time is on the shot clock. If the clock is located on the wall, when the ball goes to certain spots on the floor, then the clock is completely out of your vision. Not sure how you can watch a shooter with your back to the clock at the same time? I know I do not have eyes in the back of my head. And this is even harder in 3 Person where you do not have the liberties to move as you would in 2 Person. So you can say "try our best" all you like, but it is sometimes impossible to watch both. Trying to convince people they can is in my opinion irresponsible. Secondly, what you are talking about requires the perfect floor configuration. If you have a completely different floor configuration, then this makes it even more impossible to accomplish.
As I said earlier, if I was working with you, I would make it clear I am not doing this. I would be watching the players and not the clock. I remember a game where an official wanted me to watch the clock while I was on table side and take the last second shot. The ball moved to the corner and I had to turn my head away from the clock and other than what I was counting in my head, I had no idea what the clock was saying. There is a reason officials have to go to the monitor to change clock issues in NCAA games. If they could watch both, then there would be no reason for looking at the monitor. You can do this all you want, you are not going to convince me to change my opinion.
Peace
Thu Mar 29, 2007, 02:05pm
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
