[76lsjumb]

Stanford time keeper helping out UTSA by not taking time off clock.

Although, given the Harriel steal, it may not have mattered, I think the way the refs ended that game actually turned out to be something of a "steal" from UTSA; if I were them, I'd be ticked.

You're right that, failing to start the clock might have been a help at first, but I find it hard to believe that what the refs did next was the right, or at least the fair, thing to do.

UTSA took the ball in with 13.5 on the clock. After two [I think] passes, the ref noticed that the clock hadn't started and blew her whistle.  Then after the obligatory "going to the monitor" [good thing it wasn't Missy or we'd still be waiting for the call...] and reviewing what happened, the refs determined that there had been 2.6 seconds of play.  They instructed the time keeper to reset the clock to 10.9, and UTSA took the ball in again, but now with only 10.9 seconds left to run the [presumably, 12-13 second] play they had set up.  Moreover, Stanford had now had a chance to see what the offensive setup was, as well as a fairly long timeout [while the monitor was being gone to] to strategize further.

Once the time keeper made the initial mistake, some damage had been done, but the fair thing at that point is to minimize that damage.  The best -- i.e., the most fair solution to the team with the ball -- would be to blow the whistle, stop play, make sure the clock is working properly [while the teams stay on the floor], reset it, and have UTSA take the ball in again with 13.5 seconds on the clock as if none of that had ever happened. Doing that means that neither team is helped OR hurt in terms of time.

However, by doing what they did, the refs needlessly impacted the game by taking 2.6 seconds away from USTA and clearly HURTING their chances [at least at the moment, i.e., prior to Harriel's steal].  

If someone doesn't agree with this, imagine the following hypothetical and explain the difference. Take 10 seconds off the 13.5 game clock [leaving it at 3.5] and add .5 seconds to the time it took the ref to notice the problem and blow her whistle.  In that case, repeating the procedure followed today, USTA would be taking the ball in with 3.5 seconds left to go, play would be stopped after 3.1 seconds had passed, and USTA would get to take the ball in with only .4 seconds left on the clock.  That's guaranteeing a UTSA defeat, which would, IMHO, be completely wrong.  I can't believe that those two minor changes in the hypothetical from what happened in our game justify a different rules interpretation, but I also can't believe the rules support the way things were handled in our game.

I'm happy for the Harriel steal and the win...but, if I were Jamie Carey, I'd be really angry.

[76lsjumb]

Stanford time keeper helping out UTSA by not taking time off clock.

Although, given the Harriel steal, it may not have mattered, I think the way the refs ended that game actually turned out to be something of a "steal" from UTSA; if I were them, I'd be ticked.

You're right that, failing to start the clock might have been a help at first, but I find it hard to believe that what the refs did next was the right, or at least the fair, thing to do.

UTSA took the ball in with 13.5 on the clock. After two [I think] passes, the ref noticed that the clock hadn't started and blew her whistle.  Then after the obligatory "going to the monitor" [good thing it wasn't Missy or we'd still be waiting for the call...] and reviewing what happened, the refs determined that there had been 2.6 seconds of play.  They instructed the time keeper to reset the clock to 10.9, and UTSA took the ball in again, but now with only 10.9 seconds left to run the [presumably, 12-13 second] play they had set up.  Moreover, Stanford had now had a chance to see what the offensive setup was, as well as a fairly long timeout [while the monitor was being gone to] to strategize further.

Once the time keeper made the initial mistake, some damage had been done, but the fair thing at that point is to minimize that damage.  The best -- i.e., the most fair solution to the team with the ball -- would be to blow the whistle, stop play, make sure the clock is working properly [while the teams stay on the floor], reset it, and have UTSA take the ball in again with 13.5 seconds on the clock as if none of that had ever happened. Doing that means that neither team is helped OR hurt in terms of time.

However, by doing what they did, the refs needlessly impacted the game by taking 2.6 seconds away from USTA and clearly HURTING their chances [at least at the moment, i.e., prior to Harriel's steal].  

If someone doesn't agree with this, imagine the following hypothetical and explain the difference. Take 10 seconds off the 13.5 game clock [leaving it at 3.5] and add .5 seconds to the time it took the ref to notice the problem and blow her whistle.  In that case, repeating the procedure followed today, USTA would be taking the ball in with 3.5 seconds left to go, play would be stopped after 3.1 seconds had passed, and USTA would get to take the ball in with only .4 seconds left on the clock.  That's guaranteeing a UTSA defeat, which would, IMHO, be completely wrong.  I can't believe that those two minor changes in the hypothetical from what happened in our game justify a different rules interpretation, but I also can't believe the rules support the way things were handled in our game.

I'm happy for the Harriel steal and the win...but, if I were Jamie Carey, I'd be really angry.