Situations less than .3 seconds left

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

For parts b & c, the clock should start on the touch and stop when the official sounds the whistle to call the violation.

We've discussed this before. The touch and the violation are the same event. Most officials will not chop the clock in here, but simply signal the violation. I see no reason why the clock would start.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The touch and the violation are the same event. Most officials will not chop the clock in here, but simply signal the violation. I see no reason why the clock would start.

Agree, with a slight change, the touch and the violation are two simultaneous components of the same event.

If the clock was started in error, would you reset it? I would.

[bob jenkins]

I think the OP is proposing a rules / interp change / clarification.

If so, I'd propose:

If a player grabs the ball (play 1), the period immediately ends. Contact is ignored unless I or F.

If the ball is illegally touched (kicked, fisted), the clock does not start. If the touch itself is legal, but the player simultaneously commits a violation, .3 runs off the clock. (Or, I'd live with no time in either scenario)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think the OP is proposing a rules / interp change / clarification.

If so, I'd propose:

If a player grabs the ball (play 1), the period immediately ends. Contact is ignored unless I or F.

If the ball is illegally touched (kicked, fisted), the clock does not start. If the touch itself is legal, but the player simultaneously commits a violation, .3 runs off the clock. (Or, I'd live with no time in either scenario)

Bob, I would welcome the NFHS writing such rules. It would clarify these type of situations. Unfortunately, they don't exist at this time.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

We've discussed this before. The touch and the violation are the same event. Most officials will not chop the clock in here, but simply signal the violation. I see no reason why the clock would start.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree, with a slight change, the touch and the violation are two simultaneous components of the same event.

If the clock was started in error, would you reset it? I would.

Both of you need to closely read 5-9-1 and 5-9-4.

The NFHS has specifically told us that a player touching the ball with other than a closed fist or kicking it while simultaneously committing a violation is a legal touch. That came out a couple of years ago with the rulings on a player touching a throw-in pass (both AP and non-AP) while standing on a bounday line.
Therefore, the clock is to start on this touch. Why? Because there is no specific NFHS rule stating otherwise. (The NFHS could certainly create one if it so desires, but it has yet to do so.). If the official fails to chop, the timer is to start the clock BY RULE, 5-9-1. The timer is then required by rule to stop the clock upon hearing the official sound the whistle.
You may not like it, but those are the current rules.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS has specifically told us that a player touching the ball with other than a closed fist or kicking it while simultaneously committing a violation is a legal touch. That came out a couple of years ago with the rulings on a player touching a throw-in pass (both AP and non-AP) while standing on a boundary line.
Therefore, the clock is to start on this touch.

Can you please dig the "specific(s)" out of your archive? I don't remember this change from a "couple of years ago".

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Both of you need to closely read 5-9-1 and 5-9-4.

Seems to me that you need to read 5-9-1 yourself.

5-9-1: After time has been out, the clock shall be started when the official signals time-in. If the official neglects to signal, the timer is authorized to start the clock as per rule, unless an official specifically signals continued time-out.

If that doesn't do it for you, check out 5-8-1c:

Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official:
ART. 1 . . . Signals:
a. A foul.
b. A held ball.
c. A violation.

In the OP, that's the only signal one should make.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Seems to me that you need to read 5-9-1 yourself.

5-9-1: After time has been out, the clock shall be started when the official signals time-in. If the official neglects to signal, the timer is authorized to start the clock as per rule, unless an official specifically signals continued time-out.

If that doesn't do it for you, check out 5-8-1c:

Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official:
ART. 1 . . . Signals:
a. A foul.
b. A held ball.
c. A violation.

In the OP, that's the only signal one should make.

Nonsense.
First, how can the timer or anyone tell if an official forgot to chop or is specifically signaling continued time-out? Answer: one cannot.
Second, how does an official signal a violation? Answer: raise hand AND blow the whistle.

You are claiming that continually holding up the arm for time-out is also the signal for a BI, kicking, or fist violation, but how can anyone tell? When does the raised arm change its meaning? When the whistle sounds? If so, then the whistle is the indicator of the violation.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Nonsense.
First, how can the timer or anyone tell if an official forgot to chop or is specifically signaling continued time-out? Answer: one cannot.
Second, how does an official signal a violation? Answer: raise hand AND blow the whistle.

You are claiming that continually holding up the arm for time-out is also the signal for a BI, kicking, or fist violation, but how can anyone tell? When does the raised arm change its meaning? When the whistle sounds? If so, then the whistle is the indicator of the violation.

Fine, the whistle is the indicator of the violation. To summarize: The official did "specifically signal continued timeout", so the clock does not start.

What more is there to consider?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Fine, the whistle is the indicator of the violation. To summarize: The official did "specifically signal continued timeout", so the clock does not start.

What more is there to consider?

How about WHY the official would continue to signal time-out when the ball is legally touched on the court and properness (or improperness) of doing so?
You cannot find one rule anywhere which states that the clock should not start on this touch. You can only find a rule stating that the clock shall stop on the violation. Now why is that?
Because it works the way I wrote in my first post in this thread--the clock should start and then stop. We can debate how quickly (My answer is however long it takes the human official to recognize the violation and sound his whistle plus however long it takes the human timer to react to hearing that whistle and click the stop-clock switch.), but we cannot debate that BY RULE the clock is to start in cases of a touch other than a kick or punch of the ball.