0.02 Seconds left
 

.

B3's tap is not considered a try. If the period ends before the ball passes into the basket (which it certainly would with 2 tenths on the clock), the ball immediately becomes dead and no goal is counted.

Based on how you describe it, you are correct. It is not a legal try therefore the ball becomes dead on the horn. There is no "shot".

You are correct, and for the correct reason.

I have a little difficulty folowing the play, but your analysis is correct. B3's touching is not a try, so the period ends when the horn sounds and a dead ball went through the basket -- no points.

You could use 6.7.6A as an example.

Case play 6.7.6A is close, in that it's not a try and time expires.

You are also correct that the same play that happens with 3 minutes left counts, because the rule states that points are scored when a live ball passes through the basket. Notice it doesn't say when a "try" passes through the basket. That's where the other side of the disagreement was confused - there is a difference between what happens with a "try" and a "live ball". In the case of a try in the air, the ball does not become dead on the horn, but the horn does make a live ball dead immediately.

Another twist
 

The long pass hits B3 (as in OP) but then also is tipped by A5 and goes in after horn?

...with .02 seconds left? Is chseagle running the clock? (Sorry eagleman...j/k) ;)

Judgment call. Was A5's tip an attempt to score?

The rule states with .3 or less, a player (meaning one player) can tap the ball and acore. It does not say two players can tap the ball and still score.

Yes, that was how A drew the play up. Their only chance is a long pass from A1 to A5 for a tip. Wrench in plan is B3 gets a hand on it first, followed by A5's tap. Could we have two touches in .02?

Guess you didn't read it the first time.

The rule states with .3 or less, a player (meaning one player) can tap the ball and acore. It does not say two players can tap the ball and still score.

So if the defense happened to get his hand on it first, even a glancing touch, then A5 tips it in, we got no basket, ruling a double touch?

It doesn't matter whether the tap was glancing or not - by rule, with under .3 seconds to play, there is only time for one player to tap the ball.

Hmmm, I wasn't thinking in terms of last second (not sure why, so don't ask.) 5-2-5 says nothing about multiple touches, it only says a player can't gain control. I'm not sure you can discount the basket if the last touch happens before the horn sounds.

Actually, Tony, I read it the first time...before you edited it...and I thought you were arguing TO ALLOW the basket. You stated, correctly, that "it does not say two players CANNOT tap the ball and still score."

You are also, correctly, now stating that "it does not say two players CAN tap the ball and still score."

...I with Snaq's...HMMMMM...

Having said that...I'm probably NOT allowing the basket because I had some kind of count on.

All the rule says is that a player cannot gain control, and that only a tap can score. If the two taps are close enough together, I see no reason to disallow the basket.

I also would have a count, and if I get to "one thousand" in my mind between taps, no basket.

I guess you can say per 5-2-5:

"In this situation only A tap could score."

A meaning singular as opposed to plural?

Edit: Of course the first touch may not have been a tap?

You could say that, but even without your edit, I think it's a stretch to think the rules committee was that precise on purpose here.

How the he11 do you count 0.2 seconds?

I'm not even going to respond to that...:rolleyes:...you figure it out.

Your rolled eyes notwithstanding, I'm just curious how you'll be justifying it to the coach when he asks why you disallowed the basket that went in before the horn sounded. You gonna say you counted 0.2 seconds in your head?

Actually, and I can't believe I'm the only one to pick up on this, the thread title said 0.02 seconds. We just talked about tenths of seconds on another thread, but never in my life have I seen a clock with hundreths of seconds!

Let's hope that never evolves.

I'm not answering for RD, but I would start a count and when I get to 1, game over.

Same concept as if there were 3.2 seconds on the clock. I count to 4.

Bingo...I wonder if the :rolleyes: makes sense now...it's gotta be my handle...I am declaring that I AM NOT a RookieDude anymore...

I AM NOW DAN...with 21 years officiating experience...and still learning!:D

I love the snarkiness of people on this site who write things without clarifying and then think anyone who doesn't understand what they meant is a moron. I don't really care how many years of experience you have - if you can't express yourself very well, that's not my problem.

It also doesn't say two players can't tap the ball and score.

If the taps are sufficiently close together such that the time from the first touch to the final touch is less than 0.3, the shot counts. If the final touch is by the defense, only the first tap must beat the 0.3 time.

The only thing this rule is intended to preclude is a catch and shoot.

Fair enough. But what if you don't get to 1?

...fair enough...

but, aren't you the one that started your sentence with "How the He11"...

seems kinda, how do you say it? Snarky to me...just saying.;)

Point taken. Touche...

Not to be Snarky...but, if I don't get to one...then I didn't have a count that would help, in this situation.

It's all good Smitty...;)

Exactly. Particularly if it was a defender. They would not be tapping the ball.

If there are two taps, the first one is not the one that scored....only the second tap does...still "A" tap that scores.

I love this board for discussion just like this. I have changed my mind that a second player couldn't tap the ball and score. Nothing in the rules would preclude that from happening.

For me, I can get to "one thou" in my head and have enough information that .2 has passed.

With .2 on the clock, I'll settle for getting half way there. Do it in your head, or do an arm swing, up to you.

And if I don't get there, I'll go with the horn.

Put me in the camp of not allowing a basket with two players tapping the ball with .2 showing.

Tony, while I'm not sure I agree or disagree with your premise, I don't think your argument applies here. I believe the definitition of a tap is also a try for goal, and since I doubt B3 and A5 were both trying to score, we can assume only A5 tapped the ball, and B3 didn't tap it, but only touched it. Therefore, we're back to only one player actually tapping the ball.

All that said, I find it very difficult to believe that 2 players can touch the ball, and the ball be in the air after touching the second player, before 0.2 seconds have passed.

Edit: Looks like Camron beat me to it.

Two players jumping for the same pass are quite likely to be able to tap it within .2 second of each other.

Perhaps even simultaneously.

5-2-5
When play is resumed with a throw-in or free throw and three-tenths (.3) of a second or less remains on the clock, a player may not gain control of the ball and try for a field goal. In this situation only a tap could score.

A tap = one tap.

If two players tip it, that's it. I'm not going to score such a basket and all I need is that statement to back my call.

4-41-5: A tap for goal is....an attempt to direct the ball into his/her basket.

The defensive touch is not a tap, so there's still only one tap.
Besides, I really don't think the intent here is anything other than to prevent the catch and shoot. I don't think you can make the word "a" mean anything other than a grammatical filler.

Yup. One is a "tap" (try for goal) and the other is a "tip" (inconsequential touching). If the "tap" is first, you can forget about the "tip" and count it if it goes. And if you do have two "taps", the second one better be before the horn if you're going to count it. That makes it a straight judgment call and also imo meets the rules criteria that only a tap may score. A second tap is still "a" tap.

Wierd play that does need further defining by the FED imo in case the sun ceases to shine, the heavens fall dark and this twp ever happens.

The point is the rule states only a tap can score, meaning there's not time for anything else to occur before the horn.

Call it a tap, a tip, or what have you, the amount of time involved is too short to have the defender get to it first and then the offensive player tap it in. I'm not scoring a basket in that situation.

I'll live with that call. Do what you feel is best.

When did we start doing indoor track where the scoreboard displays hundreths of a second?

Some clocks do, especially when the clock is stopped.

Besides which, the post was corrected 7 hours before your post.

"A" is the indefinite article. It means you are referring to any of a group of like objects. A generic tap. To mean one tap it would have to say "only a single tap may score."

I agree that it's very unlikely that there will be sufficient time for a tipped ball to be tapped. However, unlike a ball that's caught with 0.3 seconds left, you must actually judge whether the tap got off instead of it being dead by rule.

This is my take on the rule as well, especially the last sentence.

The point of the rule is not to specify how many taps (the rules makers would have written "one tap" instead of "a tap" if that were their intent), but rather to prohibit a player catching the ball and shooting with so little time on the clock.

The contrast is between "a tap" and "a tap or a try."

A suggestion for editorial revision: When play is resumed and the clock shows .3 or less, when any player gains control, the period shall be over.

As written now, consider the following, if you want to split hairs.

A1 throws in to A2, who quickly catches and lobs toward the basket. A3 tips in in, clearly before the buzzer.

I think we would agree that the intent is that it should not, but........

I'm not sure how that would really clarify anything that isn't already clear. I don't think anyone is arguing that a catch and shoot (or lob in your example) is not possible with .3 or less. It's the number of taps that is in question that can be possible in .3 or less. I'm not sure it's easily analyzed or possible to say without a doubt what can happen in that amount of time. You kind of just have to hope the clock starts on time and determine if the last tap occurred prior to the horn sounding. That's why we get paid the big bucks... :)

I do not believe it's impossible to catch and shoot in .3 seconds. That's not why the rule was created. It was simply created as a way to judge those last attempts because the margin of error in terms of starting the clock and hearing the horn correctly is greater than the ability to get the catch and shoot off. Therefore, easier to just make a hard and fast rule that officials can rely on.

No reason the Fed couldn't clarify to say that the first touching - regardless of if it's a tip or a tap or a bat or whatever - utilizes the .3 or less time, and any subsequent touching would occur after the horn.

I believe there was a study and analysis done to prove without a doubt that you can't catch the ball and shoot in .3 seconds. Not sure how it would even be possible to analyze how many taps can be accomplished in that amount of time.

Sure there is; there's no need to conduct a study for a situation that rarely, if ever, really happens.

A lot of people might argue that it is possible, but it doesn't matter if it's possible or not, because it is not allowed. A catch, toss, and tap in .3 likely isn't possible, but by rule, as currently written, it is allowed. The proposed revision would simply close this admittedly tiny loophole. The point of this rule is to remove judgment, and the possible complication of whether or not the clock was properly started.

No official working a high school game would allow your loophole to stand.

What's the difference between a catch and shoot and a catch and toss?

Who said anything about a study? A study for this would be a stupid use of resources. All I'm suggesting is a clarification that would take all question out of the situation.

I wouldn't allow it either, but, as written, the loophole does exist.

A catch and shoot is specifically forbidden, a catch and toss is not.

A study was done, showing it was virtually impossible to catch and shoot in that amount of time; that's why the rule is what it is. What basis would they have for declaring it impossible for two players to bat the ball in that amount of time?
1. It is possible.
+
2. It never happens.
=
3. It's not a problem in need of an inaccurate solution.

Actually if I remember correctly, it was determined that a catch and shoot could not be done with LESS than .3. Catch and shoot was possible if .3 was on the clock hence the reason the NBA rule states a catch and shoot is possible with .3 on the clock rather than NFHS which would be illegal.

As far as the editorial clarification, I don't think it's needed. Usually a clarification is needed when there is a misunderstanding about a situation. I don't know an official alive who would allow your "loophole" JAR.

There is at least one model of scoreboard that I've seen at both a local JuCo and a local grade/high school gym where the clock shows hundreths of a second when the clock is stopped with less than a minute remaining.

There is one in our league.

Since the technical foul is the last one shot, it trumps the others before it. That is not rule book speak, but that is how I remember the concept.