New Rule

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The concept might be reasonable but we'd need a rule change or case play to do something like that. Right now, we can only make time timing corrections when the timer makes a mistake. In this particular situation, the timer did not make a mistake; he folloed the rules.

See there's the problem; if you're going to allow a timer to do that to the rules, anarchy reigns.

Anyway, didn't the timer make a mistake by starting the clock after a violation occured? They might not have been sure it was a violation, which is why they did their job by starting it. But we can tell them it was a violation, and correct the timing error.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

.

Anyway, didn't the timer make a mistake by starting the clock after a violation occured?

Um, no. The timer followed the direction of NFHS rule 5-9-4.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Um, no. The timer followed the direction of NFHS rule 5-9-4.

Yes, I understand the wording, and the fact that it doesn't include the distinction between legal and illegal touching. Are you also saying we cannot change the time back at all, even with definite knowledge that the clock should not have started?

Going back to my earlier example, the timer cannot stop the clock without a signal from the official, per 5-8-1(c). So, if, for whatever reason, I never get my whistle blown on the OOB, and the timer doesn't stop the clock, we can't go back and reset the clock to 3 seconds, even though we all know it touched OOB at 3 sec.? By rule, it would not be a timer's mistake. Also, let's say the timer does stop the clock, even though the whistle did not blow. Are you saying that would be a timer's mistake, and that we would be forced to take the remaining time off anyway?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

1) Yes, I understand the wording, and the fact that it doesn't include the distinction between legal and illegal touching. Are you also saying we cannot change the time back at all, even with definite knowledge that the clock should not have started?

2) Going back to my earlier example, the timer cannot stop the clock without a signal from the official, per 5-8-1(c). So, if, for whatever reason, I never get my whistle blown on the OOB, and the timer doesn't stop the clock, we can't go back and reset the clock to 3 seconds, even though we all know it touched OOB at 3 sec.? By rule, it would not be a timer's mistake. Also, let's say the timer does stop the clock, even though the whistle did not blow. Are you saying that would be a timer's mistake, and that we would be forced to take the remaining time off anyway?

1) The problem still is with the NFHS rules language imo. You can't correct timing unless there actually was a timing mistake made. And according to the current FED language, there wasn't a timing mistake made.

2) You're right, it isn't a timer's mistake. However, it is a situation that is still covered under the language of NFHS rule 5-10-2--i.e. the clock wasn't stopped properly and you had specific knowledge about it....so you can correct it. Note though that you can't use this rule to back up your argument also because on the throw-in being discussed, the clock did start properly.

Of course, the alternative is always just to Old School it. "Taurus excreta cerebrum vincit."

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Of course, the alternative is always just to Old School it.

That's right, why spend so much effort on something so small. We can always, if you have definite knowledge set the clock to whatever. That rule has been around since the beginning of time.

Just Old School it.....

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) The problem still is with the NFHS rules language imo. You can't correct timing unless there actually was a timing mistake made. And according to the current FED language, there wasn't a timing mistake made.

But what's the intent of 5-9-4? I would've thought it was to allow the timer to start the clock during the relatively mundane throw-ins that happen all the time, where the official just neglects to chop time in. Otherwise, the timer uses 5-9-1, where the clock is started when the official signals time in. In our kicked ball play, if the official never signaled time in, and the clock starts anyway, then wouldn't this be a timer's mistake, per 5-9-1?

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

2) You're right, it isn't a timer's mistake. However, it is a situation that is still covered under the language of NFHS rule 5-10-2--i.e. the clock wasn't stopped properly and you had specific knowledge about it....so you can correct it. Note though that you can't use this rule to back up your argument also because on the throw-in being discussed, the clock did start properly.

Why can't I use it? If the clock should be stopped the instant of the kick, which happens at the same instant of the touching (and starting of the clock), and we have definite knowledge of that fact, then why can't we make that correction? That's been my point; perhaps the timer started the clock on the touch, not knowing whether it's a legal touch, but I'm coming in and saying I have definite knowledge it wasn't stopped properly (the instant it was touched).

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

"Taurus excreta cerebrum vincit."

Are you saying you think some models of Fords are pieces of crap?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Are you saying you think some models of Fords are pieces of crap?

"vescere bracis meis"!

Got that from the Simpsons Movie....or suthin' like that.......

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

1) But what's the intent of 5-9-4? I would've thought it was to allow the timer to start the clock during the relatively mundane throw-ins that happen all the time, where the official just neglects to chop 2) time in. Otherwise, the timer uses 5-9-1, where the clock is started when the official signals time in. In our kicked ball play, if the official never signaled time in, and the clock starts anyway, then wouldn't this be a timer's mistake, per 5-9-1?

2) Why can't I use it? If the clock should be stopped the instant of the kick, which happens at the same instant of the touching (and starting of the clock), and we have definite knowledge of that fact, then why can't we make that correction? That's been my point; perhaps the timer started the clock on the touch, not knowing whether it's a legal touch, but I'm coming in and saying I have definite knowledge it wasn't stopped properly (the instant it was touched).

1) Yup, I'm saying that the current NFHS rules language in R5-9-1&4 explicitly directs the timer to start the clock on the ball touching or being touched by a player on the court. There is no differentiation made, rules-wise, between legal and illegal touching.

2) You can't correct it because there was NO timing mistake made, as per 5-10-1. Because of that, you can't use 5-10-2 because the clock WAS started properly under 5-10-1.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) Yup, I'm saying that the current NFHS rules language in R5-9-1&4 explicitly directs the timer to start the clock on the ball touching or being touched by a player on the court. There is no differentiation made, rules-wise, between legal and illegal touching.

Right, I still agree with your wording on 5-9-4. But 5-9-1 does not make that statement; it says specifically to start the clock on the official's signal. Also, it says specifically, "If the official neglects to signal, the timer is authorized to start the clock as per rule, unless an official specifically signals continued time-out". So, if I'm standing there waiting to chop in the clock, see the kick, blow my whistle, and never chop in time, why wouldn't that be a timer's mistake for starting the clock without receiving the official's signal? I didn't neglect to signal; I purposely didn't signal, because time shouldn't have started.

So, what is the intent and purpose of 5-9-4? My feeling it is to allow the timer to start the clock when the official neglects to properly start it (see 5-9-1), usually on the routine throw-ins. Granted, I don't have any inside information as to what's inside the committee's heads, but to me that makes the most sense for having that wording in there. The final authority on whether the clock should start or stop is still in the hands of the officials, correct?

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

2) You can't correct it because there was NO timing mistake made, as per 5-10-1. Because of that, you can't use 5-10-2 because the clock WAS started properly under 5-10-1.

Well, see above. I now have two possible timer's mistakes - first, if you do argue the clock was properly started, I argue the clock wasn't properly stopped. This is because we now know the kick now happens before the throw-in ends, so if the timer started it properly per your argument using 5-9-4, I argue it wasn't stopped immediately, with no time coming off, and can correct the time per 5-10-1. The second mistake is the fact the timer started the clock without the official signal. The official didn't neglect to start the clock, but did "specifically signal continued time-out".

Now, I suppose there's the chance that the official did see the touch, start to chop in time, realize it was a kick and bring their hand back up immediately while blowing the whistle. That would eliminate one of my arguments. But I still maintain the clock wasn't stopped immediately, because I have definite knowledge the throw-in was not completed, and can correct the time based on that specific knowledge.