...yawnnnn...

Good morning, people.

What'd I miss?

So you're using an NBA rule to back up your statement that you can guess (that's what it is, whether you admit it or not)? They don't guess in the NBA, they have a monitor for this. Even if you have a monitor in a fed game, you can't use it. Nice try, but it doesn't help you justify guessing on how much time is left.

No, the rule is quite specific.

Time must be added back. I consider that normal, Fed. did the adnormal and went with the game is over. Why does this not surprise me? The type of people that supports this are not into making it better, but making it more complicated.

Actually, the FED made it easier, since they can't have monitors to aid. Also, remember, the FED rule is still held over from when there was a lag time element. If a second or less ticked off the clock after the official blew his whistle, by rule, the official couldn't correct it. Now, with the removal of lag time, we can correct it. However, we can only correct based on what we actually see run off the clock.
This way, there's no guess work involved, and the rule is there to back us up.

Here's where we going to have to disagree. It is not easier, perhaps more complicated but that's a matter of opinion.

Incorrect again, you really need to get your facts straight before you post. You guys get on me, perhaps you need to take a step back. You could always, and this has never changed, you could always with definte knowledge add time or remove time from the clock. Now we can debate what is definite knowledge. If i know I blew my whistle before the final horn sounded. Is that considered definite knowledge?

And if this is the case, this is where Fed. when stupid again. There rules are setup like we are children and must be told what to do and how to do it. I understand better the issue now, thanks Snaqs, but I still disagree with the conclusion. Fed. doesn't check their logic for criterism before issuing a new rule. The clock could run down to zero, or a home team staff member could just let the clock run, and the game be in the balance, and we're out there breaking up a fight, get the dust settle, there's no time left on the clock and
nothing by rule we can do about it. If i'm understanding you correctly, they took away my ability to apply logic or common sense to a timing situation. They also, if I'm understanding you correctly, don't want me making a judgment call in this situation. That's stupid and does not stand up to criterism. What a joke.....

Ronnie RecLeague is now using the NBA rulebook to answer <b>ALL</b> rules questions. Other than that, same old, same old.......

It's easier because there's no judgment involved. It may not fit "common sense", but in order to ensure uniformity of rule application, it's not as objectionable as you make it out to be.
Before you start telling me I'm wrong about a rule, you really should check with a rules book. My statement is correct.

The FED had a "lag time" rule that stated, explicitly, that the timer is given 1 second to stop the clock following an official's whistle. Anything less than that is not considered a timer's error, and only timer's errors can be corrected by the officials. Before this season, if an official blew his whistle at .9 seconds and the clock ran out; time expired.
You can disagree with the logic, the philosophy, or the wisdom of the rule (Lord knows I can sympathize with this on other rules); but you can't really disagree with the conclusion. It's pretty simple and clear, without room for judgment.

Thats why they have those critters all over the place!

:D

Don't know about where you folks are from, but criterism is illegal around these parts.
Or is that criterfilia?

(I feel a picture showing date night in Wyoming coming on...)

Well, that's only in the Fed and NCAA rulesets. I'm not sure about FIBA. But OS is very clear that NBA took criterism carefully into account when they made their rules. Let's just be sure we keep being clear about which rules we're discussing!

Juulie - you're making me feel quite sheepish. :rolleyes:

UGH!!!

dot dot dot

Well, there's definitely yet another reason I don't watch the NBA. I can't expose my children to criterism. Can't we get congress involved or something?

And, is criterism something that can be wagered on?

Well, if you're a candy a$$ bookworm official, you could say that nothing illegal or timer mistake has happen and the game is over. However, my point is, even before the rule change, if there is .9 or .09 seconds left and I blow the whistle and observed time remaining and the clock goes to 0. Yes, there is a lag time of one second but I could always put the .9 back on. Definite knowledge. This is where your arguement is wrong. You assume that the rule change last year gave us the ability to now do this. Well, again you are wrong. We could always do this, lag time or not. The rule change this past season was moot to me.

If i have definite knowledge and it is different than what the time now reads. I now have a timer mistake. The timer may not have done anything wrong, it's just the clock is displaying the wrong time. Get this, whenever I go to adjust the current time, it means the timer has made a mistake. Just like if i go over your house and i see my stolen TV, I taken it with me. Doesn't mean you actually stole it, but the TV coming back home with me. Get it.....!!!!