The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 06, 2007, 05:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
He meant, "Why in the world do you put 2.1 seconds on the scoreboard?" There was initially 4.1 seconds. Why take 2 seconds off?
"Why" and "How" are synonyms?

Lah me.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 06, 2007, 05:50pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
"Why" and "How" are synonyms?

Lah me.
Thank you.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 06, 2007, 08:48pm
Statistician/Ref Hybrid
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 1,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbioteach
I agree but you have definite knowledge that time should come off the clock. Put 3.8 on the clock. A minimum of 0.3 was needed to shoot.
As far as I know, this is only true for NBA rulesets.
__________________
Be kind whenever possible. It is always possible." Dalai Lama

The center of attention as the lead & trail. me
Games officiated: 465 Basketball 73 Softball 16 Baseball
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 06, 2007, 09:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdw3018

I've always been under the impression that an official must know the entire duration to have definite knowledge and make any change, but I can't find a citation that the official must have definite knowledge of the entire period of time consumed...
That's been a long debated point and there has been no definitive ruling on it. I've made some arguments for taking off whatever counts you do have as you definitely know that much but no more. Other say you must have more than definite knowledge but must have complete knowledge.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com

Last edited by Camron Rust; Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 03:14am.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 06, 2007, 10:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 486
A couple years ago in our 8th grade rec league tourney...we had a ref call the game over when the the clock operator didn't start the clock. IIRC the sitch, there was like 8 seconds left...ball came in from endline...offense advanced it against pressure got it in the FC, made two FC passes and a shot went up and in that resulted in a 1 point win

Just one problem......Ref was blew the play dead saying "no shot, game is over"....Still 8 seconds on the clock! Everyone in the gym was

He said while he didn't have a visible count on bringing the ball up from BC to FC...he was counting in his head and there was no way two passes and a shot could have happened because they used 8 seconds to get the ball into FC....It was a mess that only he knows what happened...
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 08:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
"Why" and "How" are synonyms?

Lah me.
I've gotta say thanks to those who understood what I was attempting to ask and apologize to those I confused.

A more appropriate way to ask would have been "why two seconds" or "how would an official determine 2 seconds had elapsed in the OP."

Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 08:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Beavercreek, Oh
Posts: 6
Send a message via AIM to udbomber
If you had a count on as a referee, that is definite knowledge of how much time to take off.

If you ever have a count on and the clock does not match your count, you cannot adjust the clock to the violation at hand. For example, if the ball is taken out of bounds on a full court press with 15 seconds remaining and you whistled a 10 second backcourt violation with 2 seconds now remaining on the clock, you cannot reset the clock to 5 seconds to match the stopped clock with the 10 second violation.

Your count is the definite knowledge you have to go by so in the scenario posted, you could take off 2 seconds from the closely guarded count. It was a merited free throw so it stands and there was no erroneous information from the official so you now replace the disqualified player with B running the baseline for a throw-in.
I love this game.
Alan
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 08:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
That's been a long debated point and there has been no definitive ruling on it. I've made some arguments for taking off whatever counts you do have as you definitely know that much but no more. Other say you must have more than definite knowledge but must have complete knowledge.
Thanks for that response - that's what I figured as I'd searched a couple threads here and looked at any resources I could find and couldn't find anything definitive other than peoples' opinions.

Would be nice to get a clarification on this from the NFHS at some point...
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 12:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Send a message via AIM to Back In The Saddle Send a message via MSN to Back In The Saddle Send a message via Yahoo to Back In The Saddle
As for the 0.3 seconds, the rule is that you cannot catch and shoot with 0.3 or less. Therefore you would have to take off more than 0.3 seconds, would you not? Which I think leaves you right back where you started -- that without a count you have no definite knowledge.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 10, 2007, 05:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
As for the 0.3 seconds, the rule is that you cannot catch and shoot with 0.3 or less. Therefore you would have to take off more than 0.3 seconds, would you not? Which I think leaves you right back where you started -- that without a count you have no definite knowledge.
Yes and no.
This is not directed specifically at you, but all of those who have recently made a claim on this forum that a try takes 0.3 seconds. You just happened to make the latest post.
The 0.3 rule was put in to eliminate issues with the reaction of the timer. It does not equate to saying that a try for goal takes exactly or at least 0.3 seconds. Some players may be able to catch and shoot in under 0.3 seconds, but because a timer has difficulty observing this action and starting the clock quickly enough to accurately time the play, such trys at the end of a period were usually being released prior to the sounding of the horn even though there was very little time on the clock when the play began. Therefore, in the spirit of fair play, the NFHS rules makers had to draw the line somewhere. They elected to draw it at 0.3 or less. Does that mean that there is some physical reason that a try can't be attempted in 0.27 seconds? Of course, not. However, there obviously is a history behind where that number came from. The NCAA uses it and the NBA has a similar rule, but with a major difference as their book actually reads LESS THAN 0.3 seconds.
The fact is that several years ago the NBA was one of the first groups to do a detailed study of last second attempts for goal.
They found that ON AVERAGE these rushed trys for goal were taking 0.3 seconds. Of course, that means that some took longer and some took less and the players were trying to hurry. So trying to claim that one has definite knowledge that a try takes 0.3 seconds is wrong. We really don't know how long any particular try takes. We have a good guess, but that's not definite knowledge.
So please understand that this rule has more to do with fairness and having to deal with human reaction time than the on court action of any particular player.

BTW the NBA also has a rule that whenever the ball is touched inbounds and knocked immediately OOB a minimum of 0.3 seconds must be removed from the clock. So even if the timer is slow, that much game time must elapse.
That is one rule that I would like to see the NFHS adopt.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 10, 2007, 07:33am
PYRef
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by udbomber
If you had a count on as a referee, that is definite knowledge of how much time to take.

The problem I've always had with using the count as "definite knowledge" is that the majority of counts are always several seconds slow. I guess you could say you know you've had at least that much time run off. But nobody does a visible count in real time.

In this case, I'd count the basket, leave the 4.1 seconds on the clock and let the other team inbounds the ball. If you do anything else with the clock, you're just guessing.

Last edited by PYRef; Mon Dec 10, 2007 at 09:38am. Reason: Edited for time on clock
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 10, 2007, 08:25am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 4,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by inigo montoya
I believe that 0.3 can be taken off but I've never faced that situation in a game and am not dogmatic on the point. To me, it constitutes definite knowledge by rule, but others see it differently.
I disagree.

The rule states that a shot following an inbounds pass/jump ball/FT rebound cannot score with 0.3 or less on the clock. It does NOT state that every shot must run at least 0.3 off of the clock (unless you're playing NBA rules).
__________________
"To win the game is great. To play the game is greater. But to love the game is the greatest of all."
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 10, 2007, 09:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Remind the table to tell the official when a player has their 4th foul. This means that a player with 3 fouls needs to be of importance to the table.
Why do you want to know when a player has 4 fouls?
__________________
Do you ever feel like your stuff strutted off without you?
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 10, 2007, 10:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 79
What if???

He had missed the followup??? Would you reshoot the FT??? Go to ot??
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 10, 2007, 10:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by MidMadness
He had missed the followup??? Would you reshoot the FT??? Go to ot??
Depends on where the ball was when the officials realized the problem and stopped the game. If there was no team control, go to the arrow. If there was team control, that team would get the ball. It's a POI question.

Either way, whether the try is successful has no bearing on the time situation, and you would not in any case reshoot the FT.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
get me out of this mess boiseball Basketball 36 Tue Jan 16, 2007 05:15pm
How about this mess? Indy_Ref Basketball 8 Thu Jun 15, 2006 01:36pm
Did I mess up? Forest Ump Baseball 17 Fri Jun 09, 2006 12:42am
What a mess... ElPanadero Baseball 14 Fri Mar 24, 2006 04:10am
How about this mess! Buckeye12 Baseball 13 Thu Apr 10, 2003 12:56pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1