bah, bah, bah, don't care what drives coaches nuts, they don't like, get another job. All this rulebook preaching is driving me up the wall. You guys really need to get out more.

True, but what stands out more, lack of knowledge on the rules or court presence? I can ref 50 or 100 games and not have a .9 second timing issue in the last minutes. Does that mean I'm a bad official? Where do you draw the line? Rule knowledge is very important to being a good official, and i never said it wasn't. I'm just saying that in the absence of that knowledge, I'm going for what I know the best, and that's what I believe is right. Now you get over it! And guess what, I'll still get games.

Disagree, try reading some of the threads from the senior members, it is also for commorodity. It is also for sharing expereinces, keeping people in the know. This forum is so much more.

Depends on who's talking and who's listening.
It may not mean much to you, but it means a lot to me. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, never forget that.

I'm happy for you but you still need to get out more.

Welcome to the real world. Careful how you use the words respect and disrespect. You would never know an official who is unwilling to do the study or another who is faking. Just look at Tim Donaghy, he was a great accomplished official, but he had a flaw. He faked his way thru games yet he was one of the best. So he would have passed your test. you see, I don't go around saying i like someone because of there knowledge or lack of on the rules. If i lose respect for someone, it would be for the type of person you are, your character, that's it. Doesn't have anything to do with basketball or officiating.

yea, but everything in red is absolutely correct for the NBA which I referenced, even with the actual rule.

What's in blue, again with viewing the context in which it was wriiten is correct. Read the example that follows.

I could write my own rulebook, and it be better than Fed.

No, it's not. The NBA officials don't "guesstimate." They have replay monitors to determine exactly how much time to put back on.

Hey - I told you this guy was brillant!!!

He knew the rules, and other than whatever he's accused of, he followed them. He didn't fake his way through games, no NBA ref could get away with that. He certainly didn't just make up the rules that he liked. He was a great ref that knew the NBA rules cold and enforced them. Unlike you who seem to adjust the NBA rules to whatever you want them to be.

It appears as though the underlying theme in your posts here over the last few days is that you like the NBA rules and don't like NFHS or NCAA. But this board is primarily for NFHS and NCAA discussions. Why not go find an NBA board to post on, where people are more likely to appreciate your opinions?

Old School, yesterday you made some statements about the NFHS not allowing discussion of their rules, and kicking out anyone who disagreed with them. Several of us have asked for you to back up those statements, yet 24 hours later, I see no indication that you have any evidence. Would you care to clarify? Also, if you really think the NBA rules are better, is it because they allow more public input? Because they take more public discussion into consideration? Evidence?

I think that they can only go to the monitor at the end of a period/game on a last-second shot, though.

I do agree that they don't just guess - they have VERY specific guidelines as to clock management.

Juulie - I hope you're not holding your breath. I'd hate to lose you sweetie. :eek:

Okay, where do I start. He knew the rules, he didn't fake his way...., he certainly didn't just make up the rules he liked. BUT HE'S ACCUSED OF CHEATING, that's making up your own damn rules, that's not following the rules, and obviously he didn't know the most important rule, which by the way is unwritten, thou shall not gamble on games I worked. It's what not in the book is where i'm coming from, and not everything you need to know, or enforce is in the book.

Do you know where one is?

You're saying making up your own rules equals cheating?

You, Old School, are saying that?

Wow...

Minor quibble, but I'm pretty sure that one is written.

It's because they take the game into consideration. They also learn from previous expereinced that certain things don't work. Like for instance, if I blow my whistle, and a split second later the horn goes off to end the game. 1 second or less or not, the game is not over because my whistle blew before the horn went off. Simple. Federation says if one second or less game is over. So you want to have my account deleted because I say, put the .9 back on the clock because I have definite knowledge that the game is not over. You want me to turn my head and enforce the rulebook, even though we all know this is wrong. Better yet, do you recall a time when a black woman was put in jail for sitting in the front of the bus. The law states and we just enforce the rules.

You're calling for my account to be deleted. Isn't that like punishment by hanging. And what did I do wrong again. Oh, that's right. I put .9 back on the clock because i had definite knowledge. Okay, I'm a year ahead of my time, the rule didn't change until this season. I would have bet my life that i could do this, I'm the referee. Trying to say that i made this up as I went alone is wrong. I did not know that was there. The arguement that I am making up my own rules is propaganda. I was shocked after JR printed the rule, and equally impressed that the NBA has addressed it.

Last, as far as people being kicked out. I have no facts to add, just the end results tells me that the comittee is not listing nor addressing things that need to be addressed. The bridge is going to collapse in the Fed. because they are not listening to the voices telling them we got major problems here. Just fix the loopholes and quite worrying about everyone doing it the same. Everybody will caught up once you bring the rules up to 2007. I'm sorry to have to break this to you old-farks, but one-day, you're going to go to a HS game, and wonder, what ruleset they are playing under because it won't be the Fed. Vegas is using a shot-clock for there hs games. The problem is the world is changing, Fed is staying the same. We know a lot more today then we did yesterday, but we are still under the same old outdated code. BTW, we got the APTI changed, that certainly took us in the right direction.

For an example of "hyperbole," please see the following:
Or, for a further example, there's this little comparison to the rules of basketball:

Good grief, we don't "all know this is wrong." Are you accusing everyone on this board of compromising their moral values because they don't do it your way? Weird.

So reseting or not reseting the clock according to the rules is the same as forcing black folk to sit in the back of the bus!?!? Give me a break.

No, it's not like punishment by hanging. Punishment by hanging is fatal. No one is trying to kill you, OS. No one is calling for your account to be deleted because we disagree with your opinions. We are calling for your account to be deleted because so much of what you post would be confusing or downright misleading to people who don't have a pretty solid grounding in officiating. What you've done wrong is to continuously state things positively when they are clearly wrong, and to say many many things for which you have absolutely no evidence. Like that the NFHS kicks out anyone who disagrees with them, as in...

In your opinion. You're extrapolating out from your own little black hole into the big wide open spaces.

What major problems would those be?

What in the world does that mean?

Lots of high school associations use the shot-clock. So what?

in your opinion

"We" got the APTI changed? Huh? What in the world are you talking about?

2006-07 Rule Change ???
 

From Old School: "If I blow my whistle, and a split second later the horn goes off to end the game. 1 second or less or not, the game is not over because my whistle blew before the horn went off. Simple. Federation says if one second or less game is over."

2006-07 NFHS Rule Revision: 5-10-1, Lag Time Eliminated: "The referee may put the exact time observed by an official back on the game clock. When an official has definite knowledge relative to the time involved, he or she should have the ability to put the correct time on the game clock"

So in this case, if an official observed 0.5 seconds on the game clock when the whistle blew, he or she can put 0.5 seconds back on the clock. So according to the Federation, it's not as simple as Old School implies, and the game may, or may not be over. Also, if no official has definite knowledge of the clock when the whistle blew, and if the whistle was blown for a foul, and if foul shots are to be taken, and if those foul shots will impact the game, they are taken, and the game may not be over, the team behind can end up winning, or the game can go into overtime. As Yogi Berra said "It ain't over till it's over" and basketball rules are never as simple as they appear.

Statements like "Federation says if one second or less game is over" could lead to some confusion amoung nonofficials and new officials who visit this Forum. I wish that posters would be more careful about such statements which could lead to some rule myths and confusion.

I'm sure OS's supervisors don't care if he bets on the rec league games he works. http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra.../smilielol.gif

Wow. Can anyone imagine what that would look like?

Lot's of pictures.

Id wood bee ful uv mispeld wurds ande lyke pur gramur, eye bette. Butt id wood bee brillant! :D

No, but suggesting that I turn my head and say the game is over when I know there should be time left on the clock, I even have definite knowledge of how much it is, is wrong. The problem is you disagree with me and tell me I’m bad for business when all I’m doing is standing up for what I believe is right. The rule before this season was wrong, and this law before it was changed was wrong. That is the similarity. Better yet, here is a better similarity that will drive the point home. A white bus driver picks up a black women on her way home from work from well to do neighborhood, she’s tired and sits down in the front of the bus. White bus driver thinks that’s a dumb-a$$ law and continues on driving the bus with the black women sitting in the front. Later, another employee sees this and calls for the bus driver to be fired because he’s not enforcing the law. The difference here is before 2006 season, I was ignorant of the rule and I've admitted that several times.

The question everyone here has to ask themselves. Is the bus driver bad for business? Would you turn him in? Would you call for his account to be deleted?

Edit to add that last question.

Based your own statements, you're wanting to do this even when you don't have "definite knowledge" of how much time it is. If you haven't seen the clock, how can you claim to have "definite knowledge?" Oh, that's right, you're willing to make a calculated estimate. If you don't see the clock, you don't have definite knowlege.

Problem here is you are your own worse enemy. The more you try and make me look like idiot referee, the more I try to point out the flaws in the Fed. code which we all know there is plenty.

New officials, old officials don’t put down one another because they disagree or have a different opinion. Where we disagree is that you feel that what I write is bad for business. I feel that (what you write) you and your personal assaults on other referees character on this forum is bad for business. Neither should be put in front of the novice official. But you can't help yourself, can you. I think it's in the water, but some say that JR spiked the kool-aid.

The way most of you approach officiating is that you can’t have an opinion, you can’t think for yourself, and you better not make a mistake. You just read the book and follow what the book tells you to do. I am against the thought of producing rulebook robots. I want new officials to know that it’s okay to have an opinion. Question everything that you don’t understand. One day, and it’s bound to happen if you keep refereeing. One day you’re going to be faced with making a decision that you’re not quite sure of. You don’t have the rulebook in front of you to refer too. You got to go for what you know. Okay, so you kicked the call by rule. The point is, life goes on after you kicked the call. The point is, I did what I thought at the time was the right thing to do. Therefore, if it cost me my DI assignment, or my NBA job, whatever! I can still go home and sleep good at night because in my heart I did what I thought was the right thing. That is the point.

This is wrong Snaqs. There is a case play that the referee doesn't have to see the clock to make a ruling.

Some things never change.
 

Can you show that casebook play? I am sure there is a reference somewhere.

Peace

Is this a Fed case play? NCAA? NBA?

Perhaps you could reference this for us. I'd be happy with either NBA, NCAA, or NFHS on this. Hell, I'd be happy with FIBA.

I'll be here until 4:00 pm pacific.

Case play where the clock didn't start or statrted late and the referee had a 5 second count on the player with the ball. We had a violation but the clock didn't start correctly. Referee could remove the 5 seconds off the clock because he had definite knowledge that at least 5 seconds should have ran off. If there's 2 seconds left on the clock, I can count that in my head. Whether the clock starts or stops on time is irrelevent to me from this point forward.

Game management: Is there a section in the book with this title. If not, there should be. I would have it in my rulebook.

That's treason!

No one is anyone's enemy. This isn't a war, it a discussion. People expressing their understanding, their experience, their opinion. No one needs to make you look like an idiot. We see you doing that to yourself. You aren't just pointing out what you think are flaws. You are saying the NFHS rules are wrong, and that people don't have to follow them. You are implying that anyone who follows Fed rules, even when it doesn't agree with their own opinion is immoral and quisling. This is simply not the case. Further, you cite the rules incorrectly and then argue with those incorrectly referenced rules.

Bad for business? WHo's talking about business? What I, and others on this board, are saying is that people who read a statement like "The official shouldn't do it this way" might think that's the actual rule when it's not, and you need to keep clarifying when you are stating your own opinion and when you are just stating a rule. You don't do that. It's confusing.

I don't drink kool-aid.

No one ever said that you can't have an opinion. I agree that everyone should have an opinion. I just have said, and I still think, that it's not fair to the players, the coaches or the game to officiate according to my opinion. The rules are there to be an impartial set of boundaries for the game. If we don't all stay within those boundaries, it's not a game anymore, just a contest of wills. If you are following your opinions instead of the agreed upon rules, you do a disservice to the situation.

Of course, this happens. Then you learn what the rule is and you follow it. RIght? Right? Or do you just keep on following your opinion? Which is it?

Okay, now are you saying that there was a situation where you weren't sure of the rule, you did what you thought was right, and then you lost a D1 assignment because of that? Or an NBA job? Or are you talking hypothetically here? This is the kind of confusing dissimulation that makes us all wonder who you are and what your real experience has been. When you say things like this about D1 assignments and NBA jobs, we'd like to know what facts you're using. Care to enlighten us?

Let me try again. Do you have a rulebook or casebook reference other than what you think should be in the rulebook? The reason you need a reference, is because the situation you are talking about is completely different. You can only take 5 seconds off the clock in that situation because there is something you are using as a specific procedure. And you still have no reference. Imagine that.

Peace

Does anybody else think that Old School sometimes comes off like when Dana Carvey used to do his imitation of Ross Perot?

You know, what we could do is to get the mods to put OS's signature line AT THE TOP of each post, instead of the bottom. That way, we could all just ignore it, instead of feeling like we need to keep making comments and corrections.

1. This is for taking time off the clock, not for putting it back on.
There is no case reference where you can put time back on the clock without having seen a specific time on the clock.
2. Definite knowledge is still gained, in this case play, by counting. If you're going to lie and state that you had a definite count that places the clock at .9 seconds; then your integrity is also in question.

Sure. I kicked some rules at a DI camp. It's not that I wasn't sure, it's just that I didn't get it done when it was my turn to step up. In fact, if I was a clinician or an assigner, I wouldn't hire me after some of the mistakes I made.

Here's the thing with me and what I've learned to date. Several years ago, I thought i was ready to do DI. Confidence sky high! After going thru the process a few times and learning the rule differences and then trying to put this all together in a high profile game. I acknowledge now, I am not ready. But each year, I get a little bit better, a little bit wiser, a little bit closer. One day, if I keep getting my chances at bat, I gonna hit that 95 mph fastball. One things for sure, I got no chance of hitting that pitch if i'm not in the batters box.

How does my integrity come into question when I know there is time left? Whether i see the clock or not, I know there is time left. I get the fact that HS is trying to dummie it down. When we're talking less than a second, and so much of what we do is judgment and subjective. Less than a second is less than a second. At best, at worse, my judgment can only be off a second. We are in a no-win situation here Snaqs. If i acknowledge the time, one side is going to say, how can you do that, the game should be over. The other side is going to say there should be time left, and if you say, well I didn't see the clock and therefore have no idea what to put back on it. GAME OVER! Oh yea, that's gonna go over real good. To me, my opinion, go with your judgment. I've been doing it the whole game, why should I change now with the game in the balance. I gonna go with a game management call here, let the players decide the outcome not the rulebook. Most everybody, coaches, players, fans will appreciate that line of thinking and reasoning.

The only people that disagree, is the people on this forum, and you live in your own isolated world of basketball because real world, this is more excepted.

I said, "If you're going to lie…." That puts your integrity into question. You could be brutally honest and say, "You know what, I know my whistle sounded before the horn. I don't know how much time should be on the clock, but I know it was roughly .4 seconds, so that's what we're going with." If you do this, though, you risk the fact that the coach who would like to see no time on the clock actually knows the rules. If he does, then the assigner is going to hate the conversation with the coach, and I guarantee the coach will win and you may very well be done working at that level.
Others might suggest your integrity could be called into question based on the fact that you are deliberately setting aside a rule, regardless of the reason. I'm not sure I could disagree with them.
No, they're trying to make it fair to everyone since they don’t allow the use of monitors.You say this as if it's an insignificant amount of time. The fact remains this decision could very well cost a team the game.I agree with this. You're right, your'e going to pi$$ off one coach regardless. So, you'd better have the rules to back you up after the game. My opinion is that this is wrong and will get an official into more trouble than going with the rules.
You really aren't this full of yourself, are you?

How is it fair to the team that is down that the game is now over when we know there is time left? Explain that to me. In the process of trying to be fair, we actually penalized the team that's down more. I'm sure "ALL" coaches would want a chance to try to win the game and play out that second or less. That last split second could mean the difference in a state championship, a conference championship. These are big feathers in a coaches hat.

To me, this is where adults hurt the game. The game is about the players, not our ability to legislate in writing what is fair or not. Here it is, we're trying to legislate what is fair and what we've actually done is cripple ourselves. You telling the referee he can't put a second back up because he didn't actually see it. One second? Do I need to be able to see less than a second? What if the clock doesn't show less than a second? What if the clock doesn't start when the ball hits the players hand and 2 seconds later the player scores to win the game? What if the clock starts before the ball touches the players hand and the players catches and scores but the buzzer goes off to soon? I can count a second in my head. I can count a split second in my head.

Hey, Snaqs, go to www.dictionary.com, and look at their Word of the Day (8/6/07).

:)

You're a sick man, Jim.

Because the rule will be the same for the next game as well; and the next game, and the next game. How is it fair to penalize the offense more thant he defense on a technical foul in NFHS rules? It's fair because it will be the same all season long. And as long as each game is played by the same rules, they all have the same opportunity. You put .5 up when it should have been .2, it could cost the game. That's why you have to have definite knowledge to put anything back up.
then it probably will show 1 second and you just put that up. Work with what you have, as long as you see it.A lot of us will keep a count, and will have blown the whistle before 2 seconds have passed. No basket. I'm sure you can. And if you have a count in your head, then that can be definite knowledge. But this entire discussion is about whether or not you can make some sort of educated guess when you didn't have a count in your head during the actual play. You can't.

I think we can do better than this. We are wiser today then we where when this rule was written. We can do better and you know it. It shouldn't take an act of Congress to get rules changed in the federation. We all agree these rules are better, makes the game better. Why then can't we get it changed? What is the hold-up? Old farks like JR who think the code is perfect. Do we have guys in the federation that's asleep at the wheel? What the heck is going on?

I'm not going there, you could still lose the game at .2 or .5, don't matter.

Nope, you got it completely wrong. I don't think that the code is perfect. I think that it is what it is, and we have to use the rules that we're given. That's the difference between you and real officials. Real officials buy the rulebooks and then learn the rules and how to apply them. You? As near as I can tell, you do whatever you saw on tv last.That's why you'll always be a recleague warrior without a clue as to what officiating is really all about.

WOBW.

Who all agrees? You and I don't! You and Jeff don't. You and Woody don't. Who all are you referring to?

The rules committee meets every year and discusses many different situations every year. They aren't asleep at the wheel. They just don't see things the way you do. That doesn't make them "old farks" whatever the heck that means.

Jim and Adam, also please note that quixotic and chaotic sound a lot alike. I'm hard pressed to decide if one is more applicable to this discussion than the other.

Nope. Folks like JR just think the rules should be enforced as written. If you don't like them, work to get them changed.
You put .5 up, and a kid catches and shoots to win the game, and replay shows you should have put up .2, not allowing a catch-and-shoot, you can bet your wreckleague a$$ you'll never work that level again. Not only did you do something that wasn't "fair," but you don't have the rules to back you up. That's what is going to happen if you guess.

Let me help you out here. My posts regarding when to change the AP arrow are quixotic.
Old School's reasoning on rules is chaotic.

Ah, thank you. I feel much better now.

I am in agreement here. We should enforce the rules as they are written.

No assigner in the world is going to quiver over .3 seconds in the absence of a monitor. If you lose a game by .3 tenths of a second, by one point. I'm sure there's other factors in the game that I could point to that caused your team to lose, like # of turnovers, missed F/T's, etc. You want to fire a referee because he's off .3 tenths of a second. I tell you what. There won't be many referee's left to officiate if we do this.

On a more personal note. If the worse thing I did in a game was to be off .3 tenths of faction of an error. Hell, I would have made DI 3 years ago.

I feel the same way but it doesn't mean it couldn't be better. Especially where we have documented proof that it could be better. Clock stopping in the last minute of the game after a made basket. The list goes on.....

Glad to see you've changed your mind. No, but he will quibble over your absolute disregard for the rules if you put time on the clock without having seen the clock with time on it. Unless, of course, you're going to lie and say you saw the time on the clock. Go look up non-sequiter.

No one is saying you're going to get fired for missing it by .3 seconds. You'd get fired for blatantly, purposefully, willfully, and brazenly ignoring the rules as written; which state clearly you can't put time on the clock if you don't know how much time to put on. You can justify this on whatever moral and/or civil rights grounds you want to; the fact is, you cannot do it by rule. When you disregard the rules, for whatever reason, and implement your own vision of what's fair, you make the game about you. And that is a disservice to the game.

BTW, disregard what's in red above, it's obviously not relevant to this post.

So is this Old School?
http://z.about.com/d/goamsterdam/1/0...l_windmill.JPG

Somehow, Man of LaMancha seems more than fitting.

LIked that Dictionary.com site, eh?!:D

p.s. it's non sequitur

Don't you need to 'redden' that second 'u'?

My typo ought to be evidence enough I wasn't at dictionary.com. :)

No, that was my position all alone, you just read into it what you thought I meant and ran with it. You guys tend to do that a lot. They have a term for that, jump to conclusions. There is also a cure for it. Stop drinking the kool-aid, JR spike it.

Who said I didn't see the clock?

If I put .5 seconds up on the clock, that means I saw the clock. If I call a foul and the buzzer goes off, like in the video, and I'm looking at the players, but i know my whistle occurred before the horn went off. I'm putting .5 seconds on the clock. Now, who's going to challenge that? The coach, the assigner, the video? When you start telling me what i saw as an official, then you can officiate the game cause i no longer want to work for you. If it makes you feel better, I saw .5 on the clock after I view the whistle. Feel better now? Am I lying? Am I cheating? The point is, you will never know. You can't prove it so why argue it. The point is, you have to trust the crew you have working the game that they are going to make the right decision. Leave it at that. If the officials in the video decided they wanted to put time back on the clock, the only issue is how much time should be put back on the clock. I could support any decision they made here. It is their game, let them decide how they want their game to end.

In that video, I'm going home, game over, picture perfect ending to a great game. In the NBA and college, we got to check the monitor to see how much time is left on the clock after the whistle blew. it's that simple.

<font size = 2>Amen.</font size>

Okay, look. You stated flatly, several times, that if your whistle goes off before the horn, you're putting time back on the clock and you don't have any problem doing it even if you didn't see the clock. This is not administering the rules as written.

Finally, you leave no doubt that you'd be willing to lie if you felt it was more fair to put time back on.

I'm done here, and apologize profusely for aiding and abetting this atrocity.

I apologize to all of you for ever starting this thread...

There's no need for you to apologize; you asked a legitimate question.

I certainly agree with the fact that if you blatantly disregard the rules you should be fired. Let me give you an example of blatantly disregarding the rules. I put 2 seconds back up on the clock after that last second foul/shot attempt. That's blatantly disregarding the rules. However, if I put .5 seconds up because I reason the game is not over. That is not a blatant disregard of the rule. Fact, my whistle blew before the game ended, fact, the game is not over, conclusion, put time, however much, less than a second back on the clock. Did i see how much time is on the clock, no, but I can count a second, even a half of a second in my head, so put .5 on the clock. Check with partners to see if they have definite knowledge of time. As a crew we get together and agree .5, then it’s point 5 period.

Is that a blatant disregard of the rule. No, it is not! If it makes you feel better I saw .5 on the clock. Am I putting my spin on it. Certainly. I was tasked to referee the game, so my spin on the game is already there before this event occurred. Am I making the game about me? Only if you have short-sided, little brand-size disease. Only rulebook robots who don’t have a clue what the hell they are doing, they are just doing it, would argue that it is about me. I made it about the game. Am I doing a disservice to the game. No, the Fed. Rulebook has done and continues to do more disservice to the game than I could ever do. True, the rules must be enforced as written. Also true, I have definite knowledge that the game is not over. Are my games going to be ref different than somebody else’s. No! If a crew decides the game is over on that last second foul, then by rule the game is over. If a crew decides the game is not over because they have definite knowledge, then the game is not over by the rule.

You know, I find it really interesting that you argue so hard for such mundane rules in the NFHS rulebook. Consider the fact that when the clock shows 00.0, is the game really over? No, because the horn hasn’t sounded. I want you to think about that a minute and relate that to my argument. The clock can show 00.0 and the game not be over. How the hell does that happen? How the hell do you administer that? Tell me, what can you legally do with 00.0 showing on the clock? Can you tap and score? If you say yes, then you don’t understand what you are enforcing. So, if I blow my whistle before the horn sounds, then am I so wrong to think that the game is not over? The Fed says the game is not over even when the clock shows 00.0, but what can you legally do with 0 time showing on the clock? When you argue that I blatantly disregarded the rule. What you’re actually trying to do is to make a criminal out of someone who cares for the game more than you do, which to me is a criminal act in itself. You just hate on me because i come at this game from a different prospective.

Try not to hurt yourself taking that apart gentlemen and ladies. I got work to do, I'll check back later....

That just about sums it up, don't ya' think? http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...images/yes.gif

For the record, I really do hate responding to this troll because all it does is encourage him, but I hate like hell to think that any new officials reading this could possibly think that he'd ever be correct.

Can you tap and score with 0.00 on the clock but before the horn has gone off? The answer of course is <b>"YES"</b>, you sureashell can. The period ends when the horn goes-NFHS rule 5-6-2. If a ball is in flight before the horn goes off during a try or <b>TAP</b>, the quarter ends when the tap ends(i.e.-when it's good or not)--NFHS rule 5-6-2EXCEPTION1. Casebook plays 5.2.5SitA(a) and 6.7.6SitB also both very explicitly say that Goofball's statement above, as usual, is completely incorrect according to the rules.

I understand what I'm enforcing. I learn the rules to do that. You're making up your own damn rules again because you don't know or understand the rules that we're supposed to use.

http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...images/yes.gif

as I stated before.

It's okay with me if you say you can legally score with 00.0 on the clock. It's okay with me that you can run another play with 00.0 time remaining on the clock. Just don't tell me that I can't put time back on the clock if I know there is time left. If it's okay to run a play with 00.0 on the clock, then it sureashell should be okay if I put time back on the clock when I have definite knowledge that time should be put back on the clock. Also, don't tell me that I don't know what I'm doing or I'm making up my own rules by doing so. The rules are not perfect, so give me a break. We work with what we got to work with, period, and we do the best we can with that, period.

1) I'm not saying a damn thing. I'm telling you what the <b>RULES</b> say. The freaking rules dictate what you can do or not do, not me. I don't think that you'll ever be able to figure that out.

2) You can only put time back on the clock under certain restrictions as outlined under the rules. Unfortunately, you don't <b>KNOW</b> the damn rules. That's why you're constantly guessing. And guessing wrong.

3) You don't have a freaking clue what you're doing. You never have had a freaking clue what you are doing. You never will have a freaking clue what you're doing. It doesn't matter squat what anybody here thinks about the rules. We just call 'em. But if <b>YOU</b> don't know the damn rules, <b>YOU</b> just go ahead and make them up anyway.

When are you going to quit impersonating an official, JMO? I hate to break it to you but it sureashell ain't working.

JR - your comment here made it all clear to me. Old School works for the Bush administration!!! http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...s/blueevil.gif

I lot of freaking you don't have a clue in your words. Who are you trying to convince so bad that you have to repeat yourself over and over? Actually, I'm glad you feel that way because that just makes you look so much worse then you actually are. How's the kool-aid today?

Huh??

Actually, he's right. You don't have a clue to what people are telling you about your comments.

What if, by some chance, <B>you're the only one drinking the kool-aid</B>?! :eek:

Sounds like a movie starring Bruce Willis.

OS:

JR's most recent posts do what you either cannot do or will not due, and this is quote chapter and verse to defend his position. You just make things up to suit your "ignorant of the rules" positions. You are not a basketball official. You are a troll. Please leave our forum so that people who really want to learn can learn.

MTD, Sr.

Eek!! Gotta admit, short-sized, little brand-size disease sounds way scary. What treatments are available?
There's no way anyone could imitate that, folks. I think OS wins the contest all on his/her own

Why not write things sensibly in the first place, and then we don't have to do all these backflips and stuff.

I don't think even I have meds for that!!! http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...ages/sick3.gif

Wouldn't be for lack of begging, though.

I like seeing you guys do backflips, it's entertaining as hell. Makes my day....

Therein lies the problem. You can't think beyond the book. You get aproximately 2 feet away from the book and you become ignorant, dumb as a rock because now, you don't know what to do. That's when the name calling starts. The rulebook, any rulebook, the bible has to be able to stand up to criticism. If not, don't hate me because your rulebook/bible is not sound. For instance: you can not legally catch and shoot with .3 seconds or less on the clock. However, you can legally run a play with 00.0 showing on the clock. Nice.

Sometimes you have to do that Mark. Sometimes you have to defend your call even if it's wrong. I'm a great defender of my calls. Most times I'm right but occassionally I do kick the call. You know what that means Mark, that means I'm not perfect. That's right, I forgot, on this forum you have to be perfect to be a referee. I guess I am not a referee because I know I'm not perfect. However, I do get to officate some great games.

Typical troll.....not an official and makes stoopid posts just to get the real officials going.......iow JMO from McGriffs <i>redux</i>......:rolleyes:

At least he admitted why he posts on this site.....19 pages later.

Also, another reason to just ignore him/her.

That's the second time you mentioned "criterism". Are you sure you're not from Wyoming? Try pulling some of that "criterism" here in Oregon and you're going to jail, buddy! It's a baaaaaaaaaaaaahhhd thing! http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...es/naughty.gif

And that would be because it is physically impossible to catch and shoot the ball in 0.3 seconds or less...so you use something that can't happen to try to show that the rulebook has flaws?? That makes no sense...

Didn't really care about his opinion on this, just wanted to be able to get in on this really long, ridiculous thread!! :D

Hey, welcome!

Since you're the last one here, was it your turn to bring the chips?

Dang...knew I forgot something!!