New Rule

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Actually, the FED made it easier,

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

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.

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?

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.

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.....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Old School

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

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.

Originally Posted by Me

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.

Originally Posted by Old School

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?

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.

Originally Posted by Old School

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.

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.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

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.....!!!!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Old School

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.

Again, you have definite knowledge, but there's no error so you couldn't, by rule, make that change previously.

Originally Posted by Old School

This is where your argue?ment 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.

My argument isn't flawed. Your reasoning is. Most officials actually care about enforcing the rules as written. Obviously, there are exceptions. Tim Donaghy, Old School, etc. The rule change wasn't "moot" to those who actually know the rules.

And no, I'm not saying the rule change gave us the ability to do it, it gave us the authority. It's obvious that rogue officials have ability to do a lot of things they don't have authority to do. I can tell you, however, that prior to the rule change, if a HS official put .9 seconds back on the clock at the end of the game and the outcome changed as a result; he'd have been relegated to officiating under wreck wrules.

Originally Posted by Old School

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.

I get what you're saying. I'm only telling you that, by rule, you're wrong. What's comical to the rest of us here is that no only do you no know this; but you admittedly don't care that you're wrong. Instead of being grateful for having the correct rule pointed out to you, you dig your heals in and pound the podium harder.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

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.

It was moot to you because you didn't damnwell know or understand the old rule either. You sureashell couldn't put 0.9 seconds back on the clock. The timer was allowed 1 full second of normal reaction time to stop the clock. That means that the candy-azz bookworm officials would be right in calling the game over, but recleague morons who don't own rule books or understand the rules would put 0.9 seconds back up on the clock.

Here's 2 excerpts from the 2005-06 case book re: the old rule;

1) Casebook play 5.10.1SitB-COMMENT--"Timing mistakes which may be corrected are limited to those that result from the timer's neglect to start or stop the clock as specified by the rules. The rules do NOT permit the referee to correct situations resulting in normal reaction time of the timer which results in a "lag" in stopping the clock. By interpretation, "lag or reaction" time is limited to one second when the official's signal was heard and/or seen clearly.

2) Casebook play 5.10.1SitD(b)--"As the official calls a three-second lane violation, he/she properly sounds the whistle and gives the signal to stop the clock. While doing so, the official is able to see the EXACT time remaining in the fourth quarter. The clock shows 5 seconds remaining. The timer stops the clock at 4 seconds.
RULING: There has been no obvious timing mistake. The timer should be able to react and stop the clock in one second when the whistle is heard and/or the signal is seen.
-Iow, 4 seconds stays up on the clock.

You don't know the old rules. You don't know the new rules. Why post?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You don't know the old rules. You don't know the new rules. Why post?

To learn and i just did. If you don't inquire then you will never know. I guess my interpretation is to do the right thing. Leave it to the Fed. to do something completely different. I could swear that we where told at our meeting that we could always put time back on the clock if we had definite knowledge. Now, I've learned within a second, you can't. It's a good thing they changed it because most of us probably wasn't doing it anyway.

I wonder if we didn't have this happen in a state playoff game and it was challenged and learned that the official was wrong to make the change. That's a loophole, and thank god it's been corrected.

[Adam]

Yes, this particular "loop hole" has been changed. However, the greater point of it is still valid. Unless there is an actual timer (or mechanical) error, you can't put time on or take time off. What an individual official thinks is "the right thing" isn't relevant here if it goes against the rules. It's exactly the kind of thing the FED wants to get away from, because it inserts the official too much into the contest. It then becomes about what the official thinks rather than what the rules say.

It ain't about us.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old School

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.....!!!!

This is why almost everyone here is against you. You are calling people names when they quote you the rules. You also admit you do not know, and do not follow the rules. That makes you disservice to all the newer officials and coaches that look at this site for advice. That is also, above all else, unfair to the players. And the players are the most important aspect. It is totally unfair to them if you call the game using rules and philosophies that are different than the rules used by the other officials, because then the players do not know what to expect. If you are the only official in your league, and you work every game, then great, the players know what to expect; call it however you see fit.

Up until now I have shown restraint and a great deal of patience, but now I too am joining the ranks in calling for your account to be pulled. You do not offer any value to most discussions, you have been shown to be wrong in a majority of your statements, you resort to name-calling when you have been shown to be wrong, and you show very little in real communication skills. If your intent is to learn from this site, it would be better for you to sit back and just listen. If your intent is to show off your vast officiating skills, you have missed by a wide margin. If your intent is to become a joke, you have succeeded by a wide margin.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

This is why almost everyone here is against you. You are calling people names when they quote you the rules.

People call me names, if you don't like it, don't dish it out and you might not get it back in return.

You also admit you do not know, and do not follow the rules.

You got something against being honest. I think the world needs more people who are willing to speak honestly.

That makes you disservice to all the newer officials and coaches that look at this site for advice.

I am a disservice because i challenge your way of thinking. Because i try to do what's right. I might be wrong but my heart was in the right place. Plus, I have worked under other rulesets which do allow it. I tried to do what I thought was fair, you, believe it or not, is argueing for what is unfair! And I am a disservice. I am the only one that's willing to stand up and speak the truth. It's a dumb rule and needs to change.

That is also, above all else, unfair to the players. And the players are the most important aspect. It is totally unfair to them if you call the game using rules and philosophies that are different than the rules used by the other officials, because then the players do not know what to expect.

Let's not overdo it. Unfair to the players! It's unfair if i know it's .9 seconds left and i can't correct it because of a stupid rule which goes against logic. The players may just think that I'm cheating if i know there's time left and i don't change it. Above all else, unfair to the players! You are really over the top on this one.

I kick a rule, I admit it. Now i want you to keep this in mind, I didn't kick the rule based on cheating or point difference (there was a reference made to Tim Donaghy). I kicked the rule based on what I thought was fair play.

Up until now I have shown restraint and a great deal of patience, but now I too am joining the ranks in calling for your account to be pulled. You do not offer any value to most discussions, you have been shown to be wrong in a majority of your statements, you resort to name-calling when you have been shown to be wrong, and you show very little in real communication skills. If your intent is to learn from this site, it would be better for you to sit back and just listen. If your intent is to show off your vast officiating skills, you have missed by a wide margin. If your intent is to become a joke, you have succeeded by a wide margin.

It's only a joke to those who think it's funny. You may think that I offer no value to the discussion, but others (who don't speak as much) may disagree. Part of the problem with the NFHS rules is that there appears to be no discussion, open about there rule changes. Probably because they kick everybody out who disagrees with them. That's exactly how we end up with rules that are old and outdated, quite frankly dumb, and rule changes that makes no sense. AP arrow doesn't change after a kick ball violation. We really needed that one changed.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Old School

I kick a rule, I admit it. Now i want you to keep this in mind, I didn't kick the rule based on cheating or point difference (there was a reference made to Tim Donaghy). I kicked the rule based on what I thought was fair play.

Since I made the reference, I'll explain. I was differentiating between officials who seem to want to officiate the game based on the rules, and officials who officiate based on their own agenda. like it or not, if you deviate from the rules because you think it's more fair that way, you're still playing by your agenda. It may be a bit more altruistic in motive than Tim Donaghy, but the end result is not much diffferent.

Originally Posted by Old School

It's only a joke to those who think it's funny. You may think that I offer no value to the discussion, but others (who don't speak as much) may disagree. Part of the problem with the NFHS rules is that there appears to be no discussion, open about there rule changes. Probably because they kick everybody out who disagrees with them. That's exactly how we end up with rules that are old and outdated, quite frankly dumb, and rule changes that makes no sense. AP arrow doesn't change after a kick ball violation. We really needed that one changed.

Nice, you disagree with their result, so they must not have listened to people who disagree with them? That's a leap of logic.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Since I made the reference, I'll explain. I was differentiating between officials who seem to want to officiate the game based on the rules, and officials who officiate based on their own agenda. like it or not, if you deviate from the rules because you think it's more fair that way, you're still playing by your agenda. It may be a bit more altruistic in motive than Tim Donaghy, but the end result is not much diffferent.

Oh, I totally disagree with that. The end result is very different. Mr. Donaghy was putting money in his pocket. I don't get any extra money for my efforts so my motives are pure, plus I sleep good at night because I thought I did the right thing. Though Tim may not have changed the winner or loser, I'm sure he was very worried about his actions, and sleep was not as good.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Old School

People call me names, if you don't like it, don't dish it out and you might not get it back in return.

You got something against being honest. I think the world needs more people who are willing to speak honestly.

I am a disservice because i challenge your way of thinking. Because i try to do what's right. I might be wrong but my heart was in the right place. Plus, I have worked under other rulesets which do allow it. I tried to do what I thought was fair, you, believe it or not, is argueing for what is unfair! And I am a disservice. I am the only one that's willing to stand up and speak the truth. It's a dumb rule and needs to change.

Let's not overdo it. Unfair to the players! It's unfair if i know it's .9 seconds left and i can't correct it because of a stupid rule which goes against logic. The players may just think that I'm cheating if i know there's time left and i don't change it. Above all else, unfair to the players! You are really over the top on this one.

I kick a rule, I admit it. Now i want you to keep this in mind, I didn't kick the rule based on cheating or point difference (there was a reference made to Tim Donaghy). I kicked the rule based on what I thought was fair play.

It's only a joke to those who think it's funny. You may think that I offer no value to the discussion, but others (who don't speak as much) may disagree. Part of the problem with the NFHS rules is that there appears to be no discussion, open about there rule changes. Probably because they kick everybody out who disagrees with them. That's exactly how we end up with rules that are old and outdated, quite frankly dumb, and rule changes that makes no sense. AP arrow doesn't change after a kick ball violation. We really needed that one changed.

That statement makes you "bigger than the game". That is a sad commentary, IMO, coming from an official, Old School.

Why should I or any other coach read the rules then, if officials will just call the game in whatever rule mindset/opinion they think is fair?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Old School

I am the only one that's willing to stand up and speak the truth. It's a dumb rule and needs to change.

The truth in your opinion. Others disagree,and they stand up and speak the truth as they see it.

Originally Posted by Old School

Let's not overdo it. Unfair to the players! It's unfair if i know it's .9 seconds left and i can't correct it because of a stupid rule which goes against logic. The players may just think that I'm cheating if i know there's time left and i don't change it. Above all else, unfair to the players! You are really over the top on this one.

What's fair is for all refs to call all games the same, and not to just apply whatever seems best at the moment.

Originally Posted by Old School

Part of the problem with the NFHS rules is that there appears to be no discussion, open about there rule changes.

No discussion on this board? No discssion on their own forum? No discussion in Fed Association meetings around the country every year before the rules committee meets? Which no discussions are you referring to?

Originally Posted by Old School

Probably because they kick everybody out who disagrees with them.

Details, please? Who has the NFHS "kicked out" because of a disagreement? If you're going to make these kinds of accusations, you need to make all the facts available.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old School

People call me names, if you don't like it, don't dish it out and you might not get it back in return.

What names have I called you?

Originally Posted by Old School

You got something against being honest. I think the world needs more people who are willing to speak honestly.

Absolutely. I agree with this statement. So, let's expand:

You have said in the past you have worked all levels below NBA, which includes grade school all the way up to NCAA D-1. Is this being honest? You have stated you have a copy of the NFHS rule book from '04-'05. Are you being honest when you say this? You have repeatedly denied being the poster known as "JMO" on the McGriff's website. Are you being honest in that assertion? You have made many statements that seem to stretch the meaning of the word "honest".

Originally Posted by Old School

I am a disservice because i challenge your way of thinking. Because i try to do what's right.

Nope, you either missed my point, or are ignoring it. It has nothing to do with challenging a way of thinking, or doing what you think is right, it has to do with doing the right thing. And that is by knowing, understanding, and enforcing the rules that are in place for that particular level of game.

Originally Posted by Old School

I tried to do what I thought was fair, you, believe it or not, is argueing for what is unfair! And I am a disservice. I am the only one that's willing to stand up and speak the truth. It's a dumb rule and needs to change.

I might disagree with the 3-second rule, so is it fair that I decide we aren't going to enforce that rule in the game tonight? Is it fair to the team that has practiced their offense according to the rules in place, only to let them play against a team that can benefit from being in the lane longer? Of course not! It's not my job to pick and choose which rules I like or don't like. It's my job to know, understand, and enforce the rules as written. Period. That's what speaking the truth is all about.

Originally Posted by Old School

Let's not overdo it. Unfair to the players! It's unfair if i know it's .9 seconds left and i can't correct it because of a stupid rule which goes against logic. The players may just think that I'm cheating if i know there's time left and i don't change it. Above all else, unfair to the players! You are really over the top on this one.

Actually, this is exactly what it's all about. It is only about the players. If you make up something that isn't in the rules, you are cheating the players! That's not over the top, that's a straight-up fact. If you have the rule to back up your call, you have cheated no one. You talk about "a stupid rule that goes against logic" - actually, if you know and understand the rule, it's perfectly logical. If you have definite knowledge, you can correct the time. If you don't, you can't. Logical. It's easy to rail on something you don't understand.

Originally Posted by Old School

I kick a rule, I admit it. Now i want you to keep this in mind, I didn't kick the rule based on cheating or point difference (there was a reference made to Tim Donaghy). I kicked the rule based on what I thought was fair play.

Ok, fine, so your heart was in the right place. But you still did a disservice to the players by not knowing the rule. You cheated one of the teams with your incorrect call. If I screw up a rule, I feel bad because I didn't do my job, which is knowing the rules.

Originally Posted by Old School

It's only a joke to those who think it's funny. You may think that I offer no value to the discussion, but others (who don't speak as much) may disagree.

We'll see.

Originally Posted by Old School

Probably because they kick everybody out who disagrees with them.

Any basis for this comment? Do you have any information to back this up? Do you know of anyone personally that has been "kicked out" from the NFHS just becasue they disagree with some of the rules?

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Old School

Fed. doesn't check their logic for criterism before issuing a new rule. ....

Thats why they have those critters all over the place!