Oh Boy! we have a mess!

[jdw3018]

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...

[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.

[Nevadaref]

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.