Start the clock....

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In theory, yes, no time should come off the clock b/c no official should be chopping the clock in. In practice, officials are going to incorrectly chop the clock and timers are going to incorrectly start the clock.

How is the official administering the throwin and chopping time supposed to know whether a player, on the other side of the court, is or is not OOB? The administering official is supposed to chop time in when the ball is touched. The official covering the line is to signal the OOB violation. There very likely will be a slight delay in the whistle. So, the timer starts the clock on the chop and stops it on the whistle. There really is no error there short of an explicit rule or case indicating that this is an error.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why is your default that the officials are incorrectly chopping the clock?
For decades the correct procedure has been to chop the clock. The default should be to chop.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

How is the official administering the throwin and chopping time supposed to know whether a player, on the other side of the court, is or is not OOB? The administering official is supposed to chop time in when the ball is touched. The official covering the line is to signal the OOB violation. There very likely will be a slight delay in the whistle. So, the timer starts the clock on the chop and stops it on the whistle. There really is no error there short of an explicit rule or case indicating that this is an error.

IN THEORY, we should not be chopping the clock if the ball is illegally touched.

The official covering the line in question can also be the official administering the throw-in, they are not mutually exclusive. And if I'm covering the line, I'm going to know if the player is standing OOB.

[MD Longhorn]

Seems to me that it's a given that 0.0000 seconds elapsed between the instant the clock should start and the instant the clock should stop, and we, the officials, have positive knowledge of that. No time should run off in this case.

[just another ref]

The wild card in all this (I believe this was touched on above) is the timer. In high school games I believe it is much too common that the timer does not look for a signal from the official to start the clock at all. I'm sure this would be even more likely to be the case if the throw-in is a long pass involving another line and a second official.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Seems to me that it's a given that 0.0000 seconds elapsed between the instant the clock should start and the instant the clock should stop, and we, the officials, have positive knowledge of that. No time should run off in this case.

Agree with this.

If this came up in a game situation and the clock started but the first touch was an "illegal" touch, I'm considering it a timing error and re-setting the clock back to where it was, assuming that the exact time prior to the throw in was known.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Seems to me that it's a given that 0.0000 seconds elapsed between the instant the clock should start and the instant the clock should stop, and we, the officials, have positive knowledge of that. No time should run off in this case.

This is true. In the days of "lag time," I'd have stuck to the "don't fix it" mantra. Now that the NFHS has started to clean up the lag time issues and allow us to fixing timing errors as little as .1 second, I'm inclined to fix this and put the time back on the clock if it is erroneously allowed to run.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

IN THEORY, we should not be chopping the clock if the ball is illegally touched.

The official covering the line in question can also be the official administering the throw-in, they are not mutually exclusive. And if I'm covering the line, I'm going to know if the player is standing OOB.

Certainly, they could be the same person. But, in a 3-person game, the administering official is only going to be covering one line much of the time (sometimes two).

As for illegally touched, I don't think it is illegally touched. It is legally touched in an illegal location. And that is the difference.

The NFHS has previously distinguished between the two in a few ways. For example, a kick is considered a violation before the throwin ends. An OOB violation is treated as if it occurs after the throwin ends. This is demonstrated in how the arrow is treated on a throwin. If the violation is a kick (illegal contact) the arrow is not switched. If the violation is an OOB (legal contact, illegal location) the arrow is switched. Likewise with the right to run the endline when there is a violation on a throw-in.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

As for illegally touched, I don't think it is illegally touched. It is legally touched in an illegal location. And that is the difference.

The NFHS has previously distinguished between the two in a few ways. For example, a kick is considered a violation before the throwin ends. An OOB violation is treated as if it occurs after the throwin ends. This is demonstrated in how the arrow is treated on a throwin. If the violation is a kick (illegal contact) the arrow is not switched. If the violation is an OOB (legal contact, illegal location) the arrow is switched. Likewise with the right to run the endline when there is a violation on a throw-in.

Whether the throw-in ended, or whether it ended legally is important for some things. It is not important here. If a violation ends the throw-in, no matter what the violation is, the clock does not start.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Certainly, they could be the same person. But, in a 3-person game, the administering official is only going to be covering one line much of the time (sometimes two).

As for illegally touched, I don't think it is illegally touched. It is legally touched in an illegal location. And that is the difference.

The NFHS has previously distinguished between the two in a few ways. For example, a kick is considered a violation before the throwin ends. An OOB violation is treated as if it occurs after the throwin ends. This is demonstrated in how the arrow is treated on a throwin. If the violation is a kick (illegal contact) the arrow is not switched. If the violation is an OOB (legal contact, illegal location) the arrow is switched. Likewise with the right to run the endline when there is a violation on a throw-in.

I agree 100%. Thanks for posting excellent illustrative examples of how "legally touched" is interpreted and enforced under NFHS rules.
Hopefully, these examples will make some people think about this situation in a new light and realize that the same understanding needs to be applied to the rules pertaining to starting and stopping the clock.