What would you do?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Jurassic, are you saying that if I look up and see time click off after the whistle, but didn't get a clear enough view to "see" 0.1, just the motion that took it off, that I can't put 0.1 on? And if I see more than 1 "tick" of the clock, I can't put 0.2 on?

I say that's definite knowledge.

Unless you saw the actual time to an exact tenth of a second, it is not definite knowledge.

You can put back up the exact time that you first see when you look at the clock. And that's not what I'm saying. That's what the rules are saying.

When they got rid of lag time last year, this is what was stated in the COMMENTS on the new rule: This change eliminates the need for lag time or reaction time on the part of the clock operator. The referee may put the exact time observed by an official back on the game clock. The committee felt that with new clock technology and the ability to observe tenths of a second, when an official has definite knowledge relative to the time involved, he/she should have the ability to put the correct time on the game clock."

If you don't get a clear view and see an exact time, then NO, you can't put any time back on. What you actually see is the only time that can go back on. Dem's the rules.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Unless you saw the actual time to an exact tenth of a second, it is not definite knowledge.

You can put back up the exact time that you first see when you look at the clock. And that's not what I'm saying. That's what the rules are saying.

When they got rid of lag time last year, this is what was stated in the COMMENTS on the new rule: This change eliminates the need for lag time or reaction time on the part of the clock operator. The referee may put the exact time observed by an official back on the game clock. The committee felt that with new clock technology and the ability to observe tenths of a second, when an official has definite knowledge relative to the time involved, he/she should have the ability to put the correct time on the game clock."

If you don't get a clear view and see an exact time, then NO, you can't put any time back on. What you actually see is the only time that can go back on. Dem's the rules.

OK...it's under a second when I look up and see a blur of numbers and finally .4 seconds registers...can't I then say that since I saw the clock moving when I recognized the time at .4 then *at least* .4 has to go up? And if the clock was moving I should actually put up .5, acknowledging that I really don't know if it was .5 or .6 or .7...?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Unless you saw the actual time to an exact tenth of a second, it is not definite knowledge.

You can put back up the exact time that you first see when you look at the clock. And that's not what I'm saying. That's what the rules are saying.

When they got rid of lag time last year, this is what was stated in the COMMENTS on the new rule: This change eliminates the need for lag time or reaction time on the part of the clock operator. The referee may put the exact time observed by an official back on the game clock. The committee felt that with new clock technology and the ability to observe tenths of a second, when an official has definite knowledge relative to the time involved, he/she should have the ability to put the correct time on the game clock."

If you don't get a clear view and see an exact time, then NO, you can't put any time back on. What you actually see is the only time that can go back on. Dem's the rules.

[Brad]

If you don't get a clear view and see an exact time, then NO, you can't put any time back on. What you actually see is the only time that can go back on. Dem's the rules.

If there referee sees that there is some time left on the clock, that is definite knowledge! Even if the official isn't sure if it was 0.7 or 0.5, something should be put back on.

To say that you can't put any time back on because the clock was a little blurry to the official is absurd.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Brad

If there referee sees that there is some time left on the clock, that is definite knowledge! Even if the official isn't sure if it was 0.7 or 0.5, something should be put back on.

To say that you can't put any time back on because the clock was a little blurry to the official is absurd.

Yes, absurd.

[HawkeyeCubP]

"Definite" vs. "Exact" - the debate rages on...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

"Definite" vs. "Exact" - the debate rages on...

Nope, "definite" and "exact are the same thing, rules-wise. The debate is knowledge versus a guess.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, "definite" and "exact are the same thing, rules-wise. The debate is knowledge versus a guess.

If DEFINITELY KNOW that time was on the clock when the whistle blew but I don't know exactly how much, I'm putting something up. I'm going to use whatever info I do have to come up with a number. That could counts or, for very short intervals, just a sense of time.

One thing is for sure...definite != exact.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If DEFINITELY KNOW that time was on the clock when the whistle blew but I don't know exactly how much, I'm putting something up. I'm going to use whatever info I do have to come up with a number. That could counts or, for very short intervals, just a sense of time.

One thing is for sure...definite != exact.

Then you're guessing too. The rule was put in to stop guessing. Apparently it hasn't.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Brad

If there referee sees that there is some time left on the clock, that is definite knowledge! Even if the official isn't sure if it was 0.7 or 0.5, something should be put back on.

To say that you can't put any time back on because the clock was a little blurry to the official is absurd.

Absurd? Naw, your highlighted statement is absurd. It directly contradicts NFHS rule 5-10-1--"The EXACT time observed by the official may be placed on the clock."

It's the rules, whether you happen to agree with them or not. Definite knowledge is what you see, not what you guess.

If you can find a rule anywhere that will let an official guess at how much time to put back up on the clock, please feel free to cite it.

If you put "something" back on the clock even though you aren't sure what that "something" should accurately be, what do you plan on using to justify your actions post-game?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Absurd? Naw, your highlighted statement is absurd. It directly contradicts NFHS rule 5-10-1--"The EXACT time observed by the official may be placed on the clock."

It's the rules, whether you happen to agree with them or not. Definite knowledge is what you see, not what you guess.

If you can find a rule anywhere that will let an official guess at how much time to put back up on the clock, please feel free to cite it.

If you put "something" back on the clock even though you aren't sure what that "something" should accurately be, what do you plan on using to justify your actions post-game?

If I see the clock moving after the whistle, and it hits 0.0 before I can make a number out, I am 100% definite that 0.1 was on there at some point after the whistle. If I see multiple numbers, then I am 100% definite that 0.2 was on there.

That's not a guess, and that's all the justification I'll need post-game.

[Brad]

I think that you are reading the rule wrong. The first part states...

The referee may correct an obvious mistake by the timer to start or stop the clock properly only when he/she has definite information relative to the time involved.

You have definite knowledge if you see time still on the clock. Period. Thus, you are able to put time back on the clock.

The exact time observed by the official may be placed on the clock.

This part of the rule does not say that ONLY the exact time can be put back on the clock. It states that the exact time MAY be put back on the clock. Why? Because the rule in years past was that you had to allow for lag time. They have since changed that rule to allow officials to observe the EXACT time and put that back on.

Think about another situation -- if you have 30 seconds left in a game and inbound the ball in the backcourt. You get to a count of 5 and they still have not started the clock, so you stop the game, have the timer reset the clock to 25 and inbounds nearest to where the ball was when you blew your whistle.

That is definite knowledge but it is not "exact" -- but it is a perfectly legitimate situation under the rules.

The first statement of this rule -- that an official can correct an obvious mistake by the timer as long as the official has definitely knowledge, is independent of the second sentence that the exact time may be put back up.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Brad

Think about another situation -- if you have 30 seconds left in a game and inbound the ball in the backcourt. You get to a count of 5 and they still have not started the clock, so you stop the game, have the timer reset the clock to 25 and inbounds nearest to where the ball was when you blew your whistle.

That is definite knowledge but it is not "exact" -- but it is a perfectly legitimate situation under the rules.

I was just thinking about the count being definite as opposed to exact, myself.