Just like a test question!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by get

Recent HS game situation: 20.2 seconds on clock in 4th quarter, 2 point game. A1 inbounds under own basket to A2. A2 dribbles once, shoots, rebounds own miss and is fouled. Official approaches table to report foul and is informed that the clock was not started. Official looks up sees that the clock is still at 20.2 seconds, and informs coach (who stated that clock had not started) that no change could be made to the clock because there was no definite knowledge of elapsed time. There was no ten second or five second count going on. Was the official correct?

By rule, yes. However experienced officials have a mental count going on in their heads near the end of a period, especially the fourth period, in a close game.

Did any of the officials in this situation have a partial three second count going?

[geh]

By rule yes, however . . .?
If someone was counting, they would know a definite amount of time to take off.

[mutantducky]

how would you not take off at least a second or two? You have definite knowledge that some time went off. In that situation I'm going to talk to my partner and figure out a good guess.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

how would you not take off at least a second or two? You have definite knowledge that some time went off. In that situation I'm going to talk to my partner and figure out a good guess.

Ooooh. This is a slippery slope. If you're guessing a "second or two," your knowledge is inherently not definite. You need official information like a count or something in this situation because that's how you sell your decision to an incredulous coach.

...Not saying taking a second or two off isn't appropriate if you say you had a 3-second count before the shot went up. Sounds like about 3-5 seconds elapsed in this scenario, so putting back the portion of the seconds that elapsed before the drive to the basket is reasonable.

What is it about clock operators having perfectly good games until the last 30 seconds of nailbiters?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Ooooh. This is a slippery slope. If you're guessing a "second or two," your knowledge is inherently not definite.

I agree.

But, there is that interp about the clock starting early, but A2 catching the ball when it's noticed and the officials taking "some time off, likely tenths of seconds" that could be expanded to this situation.

Of course, there's also the competing case where OT starts with, say 8:00 on the clock, it isn't noticed until, say 7:00 and they put 4:00 on the clock, even though there's pretty much definite knowledge that 1:00 expired. (and the second half of that case where if the OT starts with less than 4:00, the time is added back)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

how would you not take off at least a second or two? You have definite knowledge that some time went off. In that situation I'm going to talk to my partner and figure out a good guess.

That is what lifetime sub-varsity officials do. They don't like what the correct ruling is, so they opt not to follow it and make up a number. Don't guess!

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

how would you not take off at least a second or two? You have definite knowledge that some time went off. In that situation I'm going to talk to my partner and figure out a good guess.

I agree with this, except I'm not using a "good guess". Officials can correct obviois mistakes by the timer when he/she has definate information relative to the time involved. A visible count is not required -- any definative official information may be used.

In this case, you have definate knowledge that more than zero seconds elapsed. Start from there and go up until you are no longer certain that much time elapsed. I might guess that 5 seconds elapsed, but if I'm only certain that at least 3 seconds elapsed, then I'm only taking 3 seconds off the clock.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

I agree with this, except I'm not using a "good guess". Officials can correct obviois mistakes by the timer when he/she has definate information relative to the time involved. A visible count is not required -- any definative official information may be used.

In this case, you have definate knowledge that more than zero seconds elapsed. Start from there and go up until you are no longer certain that much time elapsed. I might guess that 5 seconds elapsed, but if I'm only certain that at least 3 seconds elapsed, then I'm only taking 3 seconds off the clock.

If I don't have a count, I'm not doing anything, because I don't have enough information.

[just another ref]

I ended a game once based on a count when the clock didn't start in the last few seconds. It was jr. high girls. Home team was down 3. Visitors booted the ball out of bounds with a second or two showing on the clock. I announced the game was over. Home coach later said "Thanks for robbing us of the chance to tie the game with a 3................even though we haven't made one all season. "

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I agree. Any count which is going to be used to remove time needs to be a visible count in this age of video. I'm not getting called in later to defend a mental count. The arm swings will show up on the video.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That is what lifetime sub-varsity officials do. They don't like what the correct ruling is, so they opt not to follow it and make up a number. Don't guess!

You are ontradicting yourself there.

A 3 second count is not a guess. If you have one, you have definite knowledge as much as you do on a visual count. If you don't use it because you are worried about whether someone else will believe it, that seems to be against what you normally stand for.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

By rule, yes. However experienced officials have a mental count going on in their heads near the end of a period, especially the fourth period, in a close game.

Did any of the officials in this situation have a partial three second count going?

THREE SECONDS!!?? I haven't called three seconds in 50 years!

MTD, Sr.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

By rule, yes. However experienced officials have a mental count going on in their heads near the end of a period, especially the fourth period, in a close game.

Did any of the officials in this situation have a partial three second count going?

Can't use a three second count to take time off the clock, it must be a visible count.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Can't use a three second count to take time off the clock, it must be a visible count.

Reference, please. The rule just says "definite knowledge"

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Reference, please. The rule just says "definite knowledge"

Agreed.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Can't use a three second count to take time off the clock, it must be a visible count.

I agree. Any count which is going to be used to remove time needs to be a visible count in this age of video. I'm not getting called in later to defend a mental count. The arm swings will show up on the video.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Reference, please. The rule just says "definite knowledge"

Actually there are two separate rules and "definite information" is in one while an official's count is mentioned in the other.
I have always understood "definite information" to mean an observed time on a clock or a table person telling you an exact number from the computer console or a stat computer, such as play-by-play. There is no ambiguity here and the number is precise. In the absence of this information second NFHS rule permits an official's count to be used to approximate the correct timing. This number won't be exactly right, but it is considered reasonably accurate. Lacking that, the mistake can't be fixed. Simply making a guess at how much time passed in not allowed.