Throw in kick ball
 

After wading through 15 pages which had long since dissolved into a you know who ridiculousness festival, I thought a question about the original issue might be worth a fresh start. Trail official hands A1 the ball for a throw-in at the end line. He throws a long pass which B1 kicks at the division line. C blows his whistle and signals the violation at the same time, or yes, maybe even a fraction before the T chops the clock. We're not going to take any time off for this, are we?

The timer should have started and stopped the clock under FED rules. However, you can't take any time off unless you know exactly how much time to take off. You don't know that in this case, so you can't change the time.

Team A gets the ball for a spot throw-in at the closest OOB spot to B1's kick. If it was an AP throw-in, A keeps the arrow.

The rules on starting/stopping the clock are 5-9-4&1. The applicable rules re: a timing mistake are 5-10-1&2. The OOB spot for the violation is rule 7-5-2. The rules for A keeping the arrow are new 4-42-5 and 6-4-4.

Now lock it up quick! Before it gets all *%$#@#$%^

Agree on all five counts.

Now lock 'er down.

My point was that if 2 different officials made the two different calls, (start clock on touch, stop clock for violation) it is easy to realize that the 2 calls do happen at the same time. It was stated that we cannot take time off because we do not know how much to take. In fact we do know how much to take, none, because the start and the stop, by rule, take place at the same time. Furthermore, it should not be any more difficult to accept this situation, even if only one official is involved. The official simply keeps his hand up and whistles the violation and does not chop the clock. I'm sure that we all have seen this call made, but I personally could not say whether any time ran off the clock or not. What I do know is that I have seen B1 jump up and swat the inbounds pass and the ball hits the wall behind A1 and the clock never starts. Certainly no adjustment could be made here because of the tiny fraction of a second involved. So, having recognized all that, can we not recognize that the kick/touch.......clock start/clock stop things are one and that no time should run off? As written, 5-8-1 & 5-9-4 are contradictory. The same act is supposed to start the clock and stop the clock. To whom should Nevada write a letter about this?

There's no contradiction. As JR said, the clock should have stopped and started. If it did, fine. If it didn't, no adjustment can be made as we don't have definite knowledge. Personally, I don't see why that's so difficult.

The difficult part is whether it truly should stop and start or should not start at all. If the official signals for the clock to start, then quickly realizes that the initial touch was a violation and blows the whistle, I agree that whatever small amount of time runs off is something we might have to live with as the rule is written now. But, what if the official never signals the start, and the clock starts anyway. Picture an end of game situation. .5 is on the clock. The throw-in is kicked and the buzzer sounds. The official never chopped the clock, but kept his hand up and whistled the violation. We have definite knowledge that no time elapsed between the touch the kick, as they were one and the same. So, we should put the .5 back on the clock and do it again, should we not?

What definite knowledge do you have and where did you get it from?:confused:

What reason(s) do you have to ignore the specific language of R5-9-4 that says that the clock starts on a throw-in when the ball touches or is touched by a player on the court.

Iow, cite some actual rules that will back up your contentions.

Btw, if the official doesn't start the clock, the timer can start it instead under R5-9-1. If the timer did start it under 5-9-1, where is the timer's mistake needed to make a clock adjustment?

If the first touch is a kick, I know that took 0 time.


Not ignoring anything, just following 5-8-1c which says the clock stops on a violation.

Let's read 5-9-1: After time has been out, the clock shall be started when the official signals time-in. 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.

The official in this case signaled the violation and did not signal for the clock to start. He did not neglect to signal, but rather did not intend for the clock to start. If the timer starts the clock at the same time the official whistles a violation, I consider this a mistake, no matter how quickly he may stop it afterward.

Sorry, but none of that flies.

The official is supposed to start the clock under 5-9-4. If he fails to do so, the timer is authorized to start the clock under 5-9-1. If the timer does start the clock under 5-9-1, and also <b>stops</b> the clock as per 5-8-1(c), then there is nowayinhell there is a timing mistake. And if there <b>isn't</b> a timing mistake, you can't use 5-10.

You also can't guess as to how much time to put back on the clock <b>if</b> the timer had made a mistake.

Again, if you can find anything anywhere that will refute the <b>RULES</b> that I've cited, feel free to post them.

First, there's nothing in that post that proves there's any contradiction in the rules.

Second, the official erred. The rule requires the clock must start and stop on this play. So you're in error that no time should elapse. Time should lapse between the start and stop. The fact that an illegal act occurs means nothing form a timing standpoint.

Finally, if the timer starts/stops the clock by rule, then he has not erred. it makes no difference whether the official signals or not.

For the record, I think the rule should say the clock starts on a legal touch. But it doesn't, so why worry about it?

How is it required that the clock must start and stop? What if a foul occurs simultaneously with the first touch? It doesn't have to start then, does it?

According to rule 5-9-1, it sureasheck does have to start. That's what we've been trying to tell you.

I agree with Tony about the wording, but until the FED changes it, we have to follow what they've written.

I agree with both of you about the wording, but there is nothing in the wording now that says the clock must start if the foul/violation occurs before or at the same time as the first touch.

I thought that the clock can't start until "the ball is legally touched inbounds". A kicked ball is not a legal touch therefore no time should come off the clock right?

It would be the same as a player stealing the tap at the start of the game. if time comes off the clock you put 8:00 back on the clock before the inbounding of the ball?

Rule in this case does not say legally touched, only "ball touches or is touched by a player on the court."

But why does starting the clock as per this rule take precedence over 5-8-1 which says stop clock on violation? No one has answered this question as far as I know.

That question has already been answered several times. How many times does it have to be answered before you'll understand that?

1) The official is supposed to start the clock on a throw-in as per rule 5-9-4 as soon as the ball touches or is touched by a player on the court. There is no provision anywhere in the rules to <b>NOT</b> start the clock.
2) If a player on the court now commits a violation, the official is supposed to stop the clock for that violation as per rule 5-8-1(c).

You simply follow the <b>RULES</b> in order. Whether the touch and the kicking violation are simultaneous or not has got no bearing on anything. You start the clock. You stop the clock.

6-7-9 states: The ball becomes dead, or remains dead, when: a violation occurs.

So you're telling me you start the clock even though the ball became dead on the touch/kick in this case.

btaylor, have you gone to the rulebook and read 5-9-4, as Jurassic has suggested?

Got a rule reference for that one?

Not under NF rules (even though many of us would like it to read that way).

Why is this so hard?
 

Posts like this are the very reason why I cannot stand these rules discussions. It is so funny how people make something so complicated out of something that is so simple. If you do not know what to do, look at what the rules say. If you cannot find something that supports your position, then do not follow it.

Peace

No I haven't. I don't have my high school rulebook. I guess I just took it for granted and thought that this part of the rulebook read like every other rulebook and used the word "legally touched" but I guess it doesn't. Wow that's crazy. I don't guess I will be resetting the clock on the jump ball after all. Thanks

You can if you determine the original toss was bad. Other than that....

Look for a discussion on this on the paid side shortly. That oughta staighten all of this out.

Not that I'm cynical or anything.....

I do. NFHS rule 5-9-2 says that if play is started by a jump, the clock starts when the tossed ball is <b>legally</b> touched. If the player steals the tap, that's an <b>illegal</b> touch and the clock should never have started. Soooooo.....under rule 5-10-1, the official has definite information and the clock is reset to 8:00. Iow, Ben's statement as is was correct imo.

How about this…
I understand JR’s response that by rule the clock must start when touched during the throw-in, legally or not. However, the clock also must stop on a violation such as a kick. Now, as per the OP, these two acts happen at exactly the same time. Soooo, when considering the space-time-continuum, that would equal a total amount of elapsed time of 0.0 seconds. If this is the case, then we would have exact knowledge of the time elapsed (which would be 0 time) and would conclude that the clock should indicate that no time should have come off. When looked at it from this approach we would still satisfy the rule that the clock must start when the ball is touch on the throw-in and that it would be stopped on the violation. These acts just happen to occur at the exact same time.
Alright, let me have it….:o

Since the clock must start and stop, any time that runs off the clock is NOT a timing error and therefore is not subject to the definite knowledge rule.

I just hate it when I'm wrong about little details like that. :mad:

5-9-1:........the timer is authorized to start the clock as per rule, unless an official specifically signals continued time-out.


When does this part apply, somebody, if not in the case in question?

With that said, it would really come down to how the official signaled the events and what the timer did. If the official simply kept his hand up during the throw-in and ensuing kick and the timer never started the clock, all is well. However, if there was a quick chop and then a hand raised with the clock starting and stopping quickly, we are alright as well according to rule. It would seem to me that what time leally ticks off the clock is dependent on how the officials and the timer react to the play.

How about if the T has their hand up to finish letting subs in, and the L mistakenly hands the ball to the player, and the player throws it in?

Believe me, I feel your pain in this discussion. :)

But JR is right in pointing out the rule that gives the timer the right to start the clock on the "touch" inbounds, on a throw-in. I agree there is precedence in not allowing the clock to start, especially since they made the change in saying the APTI is not completed, and the ruling on the jump ball. I would approach it the same way as you, in saying the timer didn't stop the clock properly, and therefore I can make the correction. However, that would be a little shaky rules-wise, and I could risk the wrath of a supervisor if I did it that way.

This whole discussion can go away once they add the word "legally" on that specific rule.

I like your logic in the larger scheme of things, but until the Rules Committee actually writes some consideration of the space-time continuum into the 21 philosophies, I think we're going to have to be a little less intelligent about the whole thing. For me, this sitch is going to happen, and matter, only about once a decade. I mean, in a 15 point game with three minutes left, who cares whether 1 second or 2 seconds or no seconds run off the clock? I'm not going to notice, and no one's going to argue (6th grade girls coaches dont generally care about things like that!). I've developed a habit of always starting a visual count when the clock should start, so I can use that as "definite knowledge" and put time back on if necessary. If it's a one point game, with 2 seconds left, I"m gonna just blow it if I blow it, and do it right if I do it right. When it happens I won't remember this whole discussion anyway.

I've used it in summer league games and in blow-outs when the clock failed to stop on the previous whistle. Rather than go through the "reset the clock" scenario, I just told the timer not to start the clock until I signalled. I hlepd my hand up and then chopped the time in 2 or 3 seconds after it "should have" started to get us back to the "correct" time.

I did this in a regular season varsity game last year. Made sure I told both coaches what was happening, though, so they didn't squawk when the clock didn't run right away.

It doesn't apply when the clock is supposed to start by rule and the official fails to do so.

My question now is, Why has the fed not changed the wording on inbounding the ball so this can be more consistent?

Why? IOW why not just take the few seconds to fix the clock?

similar situation
 

A1 is shooting 1 free throw. He misses the free throw, and as the ball bounces on the rim, A2 jumps up and stuffs it through. So you guys are going to start the clock and then call the violation and wave off the basket?

I'll answer this - nope, because that's not the rule.

Apples and kumquats. If you look at 5-9-4, it is regarding throw-ins only. Your situation is on a FT.

I just hope I never have to make that call until they change the wording.

Of course that's what any knowledgable official will do. They're gonna follow the rules.....specifically NFHS rule 5-9-3.

If you don't like the rules and don't feel like following them, be my guest. Good luck in your future officiating career.

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
A1 is shooting 1 free throw. He misses the free throw, and as the ball bounces on the rim, A2 jumps up and stuffs it through. So you guys are going to start the clock and then call the violation and wave off the basket?



5-9-3:If a free throw is not successful and the ball is to remain live, the clock shall be started when the ball touches or is touched by a player on the court.


5-9-4: If play is resumed by a throw-in, the clock shall be started when the ball touches, or is touched by, a player on the court after it is released by the thrower.


What is the difference?

Actually, nothing - I was so focused on the past discussion regarding 5-9-4, I glossed over 5-9-3. The issue is still the same - "touching" vs. "legally touching".

Not to be done in a varsity game. Have them put the correct time back up if you have definite knowledge. Otherwise, leave it along.

At least, if I understand correctly, if this accidentally works out the way I consider to be right, everything is okay. If the first touch on the court is a kick, the official chopping the clock, even if done, which many times it would not be, would be a blur mixed in with the signal for the violation. And whether the timer is watching for the chop or watching for the touch on the court to start the clock, the whistle will follow so closely that I'm guessing many times the clock will not start. None of this is terribly significant unless it all happens at the end of a period with a very small amount of time, and then I guess each of us will have to decide at that time how to proceed.

Actually had this happen this weekend with an old style clock. We had a bonus situation with 8 seconds left, tie game 61-61, shot, miss, foul on the rebound. No time off the clock, shoot 1n1 again. Made both buckets. On the ensueing inbound, long pass to midcourt, foul on the play. No time off the clock. We then walk down to the other end to shoot 1n1. Still 8 seconds. Players scream at me, time should have come off. I just said no, times right, shooting 1n1.

Maybe because that particular clock is really difficult to deal with? I know we've got quite a few in this area that are just weird, and the clock person isn't experienced, and it's too disruptive to try to reset it just for a few seconds.

In my case, we tried, but it took longer than a "few seconds". The guy couldn't seem to get it right. I opted to get the game moving.

If that is the case, a phone call to the A/D or letter to the state office detailing the problem. We either need to get a better clock operator (A/D can fix that) or the clock needs maintenance. One or the other, but if it's interfering with your game. You need to follow up.