Continue play or not?

[dumbref]

With 0:08.6 seconds remaining in the fourth period; B leads A 20 -17; A’s ball at the 50 yard line and the clock starts with the snap. A1 completes a pass to A2 who is tackled in the field of play near the sideline at B’s 30 yard line. The linesman winds the clock to indicate the player was tackled in bounds, makes the spot, then stops the clock for an officials time-out to reset the chains – the clock reads 0:00. The back judge is in the side zone and observes there was 0:01.5 seconds remaining when the play ended but before the linesman could stop the clock.

1. Should 0:01.5 be put on the clock and allow A the possibility to kick a field goal or should the covering official’s normal mechanics allow the game to end?
2. Had the play ended out of bounds, would there be any difference?
3. If B’s head coach was requesting a time out after the play ended with 0:01.5?

Opinions are fine - but if any can direct me to a case play or comment, it would be appreciated.

[MJT]

Originally posted by dumbref
With 0:08.6 seconds remaining in the fourth period; B leads A 20 -17; A’s ball at the 50 yard line and the clock starts with the snap. A1 completes a pass to A2 who is tackled in the field of play near the sideline at B’s 30 yard line. The linesman winds the clock to indicate the player was tackled in bounds, makes the spot, then stops the clock for an officials time-out to reset the chains – the clock reads 0:00. The back judge is in the side zone and observes there was 0:01.5 seconds remaining when the play ended but before the linesman could stop the clock.

1. Should 0:01.5 be put on the clock and allow A the possibility to kick a field goal or should the covering official’s normal mechanics allow the game to end?
2. Had the play ended out of bounds, would there be any difference?
3. If B’s head coach was requesting a time out after the play ended with 0:01.5?

Opinions are fine - but if any can direct me to a case play or comment, it would be appreciated.

That is exactly why we have been instructed by our NAIA head of officials to not wind the clock if the 1st down is reached by the sideline. Especially at the end of the 1/2 or game situation, it is much more important that the clock gets stopped, for the exact reason mention in the above post. That was poor use of an accepted mechinic which as a result caused a major problem.
That being said, if I know he is down, and the clock should have been stopped with 1.5 seconds left, then I am going to put 1.5 seconds back on the clock.
In #2, he went OOB's and you saw 1.5 on the clock when he did, you put the time up.
In #3, I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but if there is time left on the clock, and the coach wants a TO, he gets it.
On my HS crew, we will not use that mechanic if inside of 2 minutes of a the 1/2 or last 2 minutes of the game. Also, we will not use it if a team is in the hurry up with more than 2 minutes left.

[Green]

Originally posted by dumbref
With 0:08.6 seconds remaining in the fourth period; B leads A 20 -17; A’s ball at the 50 yard line and the clock starts with the snap. A1 completes a pass to A2 who is tackled in the field of play near the sideline at B’s 30 yard line. The linesman winds the clock to indicate the player was tackled in bounds, makes the spot, then stops the clock for an officials time-out to reset the chains – the clock reads 0:00. The back judge is in the side zone and observes there was 0:01.5 seconds remaining when the play ended but before the linesman could stop the clock.

1. Should 0:01.5 be put on the clock and allow A the possibility to kick a field goal or should the covering official’s normal mechanics allow the game to end?
2. Had the play ended out of bounds, would there be any difference?
3. If B’s head coach was requesting a time out after the play ended with 0:01.5?

Opinions are fine - but if any can direct me to a case play or comment, it would be appreciated.

Being that the back judge had evidence the clock read 0:01.5, is just reason to put the time on the clock. Following the rules to the letter is one thing but doing what’s right, is what should prevail.

The NFHS officials manual includes the passage, “Officials must have a football sense which supersedes the technical application of the rules so that the game goes smoothly.”

This is the rule I would use in this situation.

Also, being that time was critical, the normal mechanic of winding the clock showing the play ended inbounds, should NOT have been followed.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by dumbref
With 0:08.6 seconds remaining in the fourth period; B leads A 20 -17; A’s ball at the 50 yard line and the clock starts with the snap. A1 completes a pass to A2 who is tackled in the field of play near the sideline at B’s 30 yard line. The linesman winds the clock to indicate the player was tackled in bounds, makes the spot, then stops the clock for an officials time-out to reset the chains – the clock reads 0:00. The back judge is in the side zone and observes there was 0:01.5 seconds remaining when the play ended but before the linesman could stop the clock.

1. Should 0:01.5 be put on the clock and allow A the possibility to kick a field goal or should the covering official’s normal mechanics allow the game to end?
2. Had the play ended out of bounds, would there be any difference?
3. If B’s head coach was requesting a time out after the play ended with 0:01.5?

Opinions are fine - but if any can direct me to a case play or comment, it would be appreciated.

How does giving the wind the clock signal improve the gmae when you know you just have to stop the clock immediately afterwards?

I'll tell you the answer: it doesn't. In Canada, there will be one more regardless (we don't have to snap before the clock reads zeros), but why would you not afford A the opportunity to tie the game?

Although it is nice to have officials that understand the game, there are many Cdn rules that don't require the officials to "...have a football sense which supersedes the technical application of the rules so that the game goes smoothly." As such, we don't need to worry about these silly end-of-game scenarios.

[Patton]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Green

Also, being that time was critical, the normal mechanic of winding the clock showing the play ended inbounds, should NOT have been followed.

If you don't wind the clock, a coach may mistake that to mean the player was out of bounds. Therefore, you had better communicate with the coaches that you have a "hot" clock. If you don't, then when you wind it after the chains are set, plan on taking some serious heat!!

[Green]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Patton

Originally posted by Green

If you don't wind the clock, a coach may mistake that to mean the player was out of bounds. Therefore, you had better communicate with the coaches that you have a "hot" clock. If you don't, then when you wind it after the chains are set, plan on taking some serious heat!!

Patton,

When time is critical, stopping the clock is paramount. The officials can verbally communicate to the coaches that the clock is hot and will start on ready-for-play. Also, the play ends on the 30 yard line which is within the team's box and both coaches are in close proximity to the officails.

In this case the official winds the clock telling the coaches the clock will start on the ready and by doing so, consumed the time the team needed to run a play. So what did winding the clock accomplish?

With 0:01.5 seconds, no doubt a time-out would’ve been needed to run a play.

[Patton]

I wasn't disagreeing that stopping the clock is first and foremost in this situation. However, the "wind the clock" signal is a very important communication signal to the coaches (especially when the offensive coach is on the opposite side of the field from where the play occurs). My point (although poorly conveyed) was if you don't give the signal the coaches need to know immediately that the clock is hot.

[simpson]

Just curious, how did the BJ know there was 1.5 seconds left on the clock? I could understand 1 second or 2 seconds, but 1.5 seems awfully specific if the clock is running.

[Theisey]

The tenths of seconds are for some reason, being displayed on many of the field clocks for football, that's how the BJ knows. Football doesn't need them, but then that's just one opinion.

I for one advocate winding then killing the clock by the covering official. However, for obvious first downs, the off-side offical should be killing it on obvious first downs immediately while observing the clock. Time can and should be put back on when the game is nearing the end.

Timers should be keying on the official nearest the ball, so this kind of problem will occur. To be honest, on long gains for very obvious first downs near the sidelines, I do agree that stopping the clock should be all that is needed not matter how much time remains.

[Warrenkicker]

These new scoreboards show tenths of seconds because this clock is a multi-use device. It counts down for football season and it counts up for track meets. They unofficially time events during track meets so the non-competitors get an idea of the times in the races. If the tenths number was an extra spot on the scoreboard then I could see that they could cover it up but normally when the clock goes under 1 minute all the numbers shift one spot to the left and tenths are displayed. If this could be turned off I think that many would be but I don't think that it can be turned off.

[Dommer1]

Well, covering it up would not work, as you could lose the last second. When there is less than 1 second left, lets say .9 seconds, you would then not see it. On a "normal" clock, the clock would now show 1 full second. It would go to zero when the ENTIRE second had elapsed. That's the difference between these two types of clocks.

[ABoselli]

We had a clock stoppage in a JC game this year at .9 after a TO by the visitors trying to get a FG attempt off.

It was the 2nd quarter and the coach from the home team says to the R, "There's no tenths in college football! But since it's our gaffe, we have to play it"

Has anybody heard that said? No tenths by rule?

[AndrewMcCarthy]

Originally posted by ABoselli
It was the 2nd quarter and the coach from the home team says to the R, "There's no tenths in college football! But since it's our gaffe, we have to play it"

If it had been a "normal" clock, it would have still said "0:01" at that moment anyway.

The clocks with the tenths all have a way of turning that feature off- the operator rarely has the know-how to do it, however. Just like the annoying horn or siren.

[simpson]

I understand that clocks have a tenths of a second on them. I'm curious how a BJ knows what tenth of a second the clock SHOULD have stopped on. Go back and read the original post. The BJ claimed the clock should have stopped at 1.5 but continued running to 0. That BJ, either has better eyesight than I do or just made up the .5. I understand when you stop a clock, the .5 or .9 is easily identifiable. How do you know what tenth of a second the clock should have stopped on if it keeps running?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by AndrewMcCarthy

If it had been a "normal" clock, it would have still said "0:01" at that moment anyway.

The clocks with the tenths all have a way of turning that feature off- the operator rarely has the know-how to do it, however. Just like the annoying horn or siren.

Hmm... I disagree. There are some clocks that turn to 14:59 as soon as they're turned on. In those cases, there is actually more time remaining than what reads on the clock. For a tenth of a second, there is 14:59.9s, 14:59.8s, 14:59.7s, etc... until 14:59.0s at which point it changes to 14:58.

Carry that down to the dying seconds. At 0:00.9, that clock will read 0:00. These clocks have the ability to be stopped with zeros, but not have the horn go off.