Start Clock or Not

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

NO! This was part of our discussion of the rule change last season. A player intentionally kicking the ball during a throw-in is NOT a legal touch, and the clock should not start. If any time does come off the clock, this is a timing mistake and can be corrected by the referee. Please note that along with the word "legally" being added to 4-42-5, it was also added to 5-9-4 for the 2007-08 season.

So if the clock reads 5:52 during the dead ball previous to the throwin, and there is a kick during the throwin, as described in this thread, and then the clock reads 5:50, then we can change it back to 5:52?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So if the clock reads 5:52 during the dead ball previous to the throwin, and there is a kick during the throwin, as described in this thread, and then the clock reads 5:50, then we can change it back to 5:52?

Yep, not only can you, but you should.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yep, not only can you, but you should.

No, you shouldn't. Read the extra commentary that comes with interpreations on timing errors. The intent of the rules dealing with timing errors has been expressly stated that it is not to deal with 2 seconds with 5 minutes remaining but in the final seconds/minute of a quarter/game.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, you shouldn't. Read the extra commentary that comes with interpreations on timing errors. The intent of the rules dealing with timing errors has been expressly stated that it is not to deal with 2 seconds with 5 minutes remaining but in the final seconds/minute of a quarter/game.

Camron,
If you would kindly post the text to which you are referring, I will happily review it. However, without seeing it I believe that it is likely referring to giving some reasonable leeway to the timer to start or stop that clock for natural human reaction, and not being overly picky and constantly adjusting the game clock. I seriously doubt that the advice you mention is intended to apply to a situation such as this in which the clock was stopped, the officials have definite knowledge of what the time was, and although the clock should not have started, it mistakenly did.

For example, do you believe that it would be incorrect to restore the time if a throw-in went the length of the court untouched and OOB, but the timer mistakenly started the clock when the ball bounced on the court and six seconds came off in the middle of the 2nd quarter?

I certainly hope not.

[som44]

Still not sure if the clock should start at all or not. In latest referee mag. ask us section, page n14 re: kickball it says the clock should start. I know they are not always right but....Looking forward to other thoughts..also will ask our interperter at our meeting on Sunday

[Adam]

Originally Posted by som44

Still not sure if the clock should start at all or not. In latest referee mag. ask us section, page n14 re: kickball it says the clock should start. I know they are not always right but....Looking forward to other thoughts..also will ask our interperter at our meeting on Sunday

Is a kick a legal touch?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by som44

Still not sure if the clock should start at all or not. In latest referee mag. ask us section, page n14 re: kickball it says the clock should start. I know they are not always right but....Looking forward to other thoughts..also will ask our interperter at our meeting on Sunday

Add my vote to those who say that the clock should not start.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Camron,
If you would kindly post the text to which you are referring, I will happily review it. However, without seeing it I believe that it is likely referring to giving some reasonable leeway to the timer to start or stop that clock for natural human reaction, and not being overly picky and constantly adjusting the game clock. I seriously doubt that the advice you mention is intended to apply to a situation such as this in which the clock was stopped, the officials have definite knowledge of what the time was, and although the clock should not have started, it mistakenly did.

For example, do you believe that it would be incorrect to restore the time if a throw-in went the length of the court untouched and OOB, but the timer mistakenly started the clock when the ball bounced on the court and six seconds came off in the middle of the 2nd quarter?

I certainly hope not.

In correct? No. It would never be incorrect to fix the time....just potentially unnecessary and not required.

Six seconds, however, probably will fix it....but if it was 1 or 2, probably not.


Note that EVERY case play from the casebook (there are 5 of them) all have just seconds remaining in the 4th quarter.

Also look at the NFHS Comments on the rule changes...

LAG TIME ELIMINATED (5-10-1):

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.

Note that the comments refer to the times when the clock shows 10ths as the reason for making the change....implying that it was only the closing seconds that are an issue. There is nothing new for any part of the game before 1:00 remaining. The clocks are unchanged. Note also that the rule and comments use the word "may", not "shall".