Winding and stopping clock

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

On that play, you have to wind. You're telling the clock operator that progress was stopped inbounds.

I'm not a huge fan of winding and then stopping on first downs. On all first downs in the side zone, I'm asking the wing before the RFP if I'm winding or not. To me, it's repetitive and many officials don't make it look good. And it could be confusing to the clock operator who may take his eyes away after the initial wind.

And on any first down play in my side zone, I'm signalling my white hat in or out before he even looks over, and waiting for eye contact and a nod.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

And on any first down play in my side zone, I'm signalling my white hat in or out before he even looks over, and waiting for eye contact and a nod.

Sure. For us, it's a mutual thing. I'm looking and he's telling me. Same with ball placement near the tape in the middle of the chain -- I'm looking to the linesman and he's telling me if "five will get us one." Lots of communication all game long -- some verbal, some not.

[JRutledge]

I do not see how a play is in the side zone you are not winding the clock if the ball is ruled inbounds? This is not just crew communication this is for the clock operator. I am not talking about a play in the middle. I am only talking about a play where clock status is at issue. Why would you not want to tell the clock operator and the coaches what you got? That is only common sense. The Referee might not even see you give the signal and it is really not for him anyway. But if you kill the clock and wind it on the RFP I can see a coach being caught off guard and not hurrying as they think the clock is not going to start.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not see how a play is in the side zone you are not winding the clock if the ball is ruled inbounds? This is not just crew communication this is for the clock operator. I am not talking about a play in the middle. I am only talking about a play where clock status is at issue. Why would you not want to tell the clock operator and the coaches what you got? That is only common sense. The Referee might not even see you give the signal and it is really not for him anyway. But if you kill the clock and wind it on the RFP I can see a coach being caught off guard and not hurrying as they think the clock is not going to start.

Peace

On a play that gains a first down where I'm winding it after the box is set, I'm communicating to the coaches that we're winding on the ready. The signal from the wing, to me, is unnecessary.

Your mileage may (and seems to) vary. I just don't think that giving two opposing signals back to back is great communication, either. A coach may see the second signal only and could misinterpret anyway.

Always felt that way, but not terribly strongly. Shrug.

[JRutledge]

I think trying to rely on communicating to the coaches independent of our signally would either slow us down or they would not get the information as consistently. Then again as long as your crew knows what is going on ultimately that is all that really matters. But that is what other levels do and how we are instructed to do that mechanic. It also shows well on tape for an easy reference. Tape will not show our crew signals.

Peace

[ajmc]

This seems like another, "much ado about nothing" special attention. Wing officials giving a wind signal on plays close to the sideline is one of a clock operators best friends. It answers an otherwise open question.

I can't see where eliminating this practice makes the tiniest bit of sense or serves any useful purpose. One of the other "Timer's best friend" signals is the often criticized practice of giving a stop the clock signal after giving the incomplete pass signal. Yes, I understand that the incomplete pass signal, in and by itself denotes the clock should be stopped, but it only works when the clock operator can see the signal.

Giving an incomplete pass signal in front of the team area on the clock side of the field is, a lot more often than not, unseen by the clock operator, and following up with a fully extended Stop the clock signal is the ONLY signal the clock operator will actually see. Of course that brings up yet another "Timer's best friend" signal, which is the TO signal given by the opposite wing man (Umpire or Referee) who follows up the incomplete pass signal.

Thr single most important purpose of any officials signal is to convey a message to an intended party. #1 priority of clock related signals is communicating with the clock operator, anything and everything else is secondary and doesn't matter nearly as much.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Giving an incomplete pass signal in front of the team area on the clock side of the field is, a lot more often than not, unseen by the clock operator, and following up with a fully extended Stop the clock signal is the ONLY signal the clock operator will actually see. Of course that brings up yet another "Timer's best friend" signal, which is the TO signal given by the opposite wing man (Umpire or Referee) who follows up the incomplete pass signal.

Never seen this as a problem if they give the proper signal the way you are supposed to.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Are you saying that in Minn. someone has instructed officials to give signals for the clock operator that are contradictory as far as everybody on the field is concerned, just so the clock operator and others concerned will keep in mind that a "wind" command is "in the pocket" while awaiting RFP when a new series is awarded? Couldn't you use some other signal than one that's supposed to mean "run the clock now"?

[phansen]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Are you saying that in Minn. someone has instructed officials to give signals for the clock operator that are contradictory as far as everybody on the field is concerned, just so the clock operator and others concerned will keep in mind that a "wind" command is "in the pocket" while awaiting RFP when a new series is awarded? Couldn't you use some other signal than one that's supposed to mean "run the clock now"?

On the Minnesota officials website, they gave an example of an official winding the clock before stopping it after a first down. They told us not to do it anymore. I don't exactly know their reasoning, so I was asking any MN official "in the know" if we should or shouldn't wind the clock in the side zone where forward progress is established inbounds before being taken out of bounds behind progress spot. If we give no signal the clock should still run, however I believe it's a good communication tool to wind the clock in this situation. That is only my opinion. I can see both sides of the argument and was just wondering which they want us to do since this situation wasn't specifically covered.

[Canned Heat]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Sure. For us, it's a mutual thing. I'm looking and he's telling me. Same with ball placement near the tape in the middle of the chain -- I'm looking to the linesman and he's telling me if "five will get us one." Lots of communication all game long -- some verbal, some not.

Same here.