RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: Navcom on September 24, 2020, 02:52:11 PM
-
I'm seeking to buy used play clocks for my kids High school field. Any advice on how to find used play clocks ? new clocks are 10K.
-
I'm seeking to buy used play clocks for my kids High school field. Any advice on how to find used play clocks ? new clocks are 10K.
Check your local school district(s). They may have some, or know of a district that has some. Next, check with manufacturer’s, such as Daktronics or Spectrum; see if they have any used clocks. Be sure they do 25 and 40 seconds, though.
Good luck.
-
Check with you State's governing high school body. The use of play clock displays have been banned in California, even on college fields that have them.
-
Check with you State's governing high school body. The use of play clock displays have been banned in California, even on college fields that have them.
Let me guess, playclocks are known to California to cause cancer. Seriously, what is the reason?
-
I'm seeking to buy used play clocks for my kids High school field. Any advice on how to find used play clocks ? new clocks are 10K.
Yeah, have more faith in the R/BJ's ability and judgment to regulate and monitor "Play Clock" duration at the Hight School level. Those players that move on to higher levels will have ample time and opportunity to learn and adjust, and High Schools, across the nation can save bundles of cash for far more important purposes.
-
the nation can save bundles of cash for far more important purposes.
Nah, they'll just have to spend it on shot clocks in HS basketball if that ever gets pushed through.
-
Let me guess, playclocks are known to California to cause cancer. Seriously, what is the reason?
Too many schools likely complained that they don't have the money to spend on a play clock system. There really is no legitimate reason why the said no. California is a screwed up state.
-
Yeah, have more faith in the R/BJ's ability and judgment to regulate and monitor "Play Clock" duration at the Hight School level. Those players that move on to higher levels will have ample time and opportunity to learn and adjust, and High Schools, across the nation can save bundles of cash for far more important purposes.
Whatever dude.
-
All of our contracted schools have them — even the schools in disadvantaged areas. Many were paid for by soft drink companies in exchange for exclusive pouring rights.
Some of our schools paid extra for play clocks with a smaller built-in game clock on top. That really helps the crew in time-sensitive situations.
-
Some of our schools paid extra for play clocks with a smaller built-in game clock on top. That really helps the crew in time-sensitive situations.
Indeed - game clocks at both ends of the field are SWEEEEET! That should be the standard "banker's package" or "drink vendor's package," i.e., game clocks at both ends of the field and play clocks (more that 12' off the end line, padded supports, and at least 10' high). Y'all might note that play clocks are not required, but are strongly recommended in Texas (U.I.L.). I have not encountered a field/stadium that didn't have them since I returned to HS football in 2017. Now, competent play clock operators, on the other hand...
-
Too many schools likely complained that they don't have the money to spend on a play clock system. There really is no legitimate reason why the said no. California is a screwed up state.
Illinois is no better when it comes to play clocks- we are at most about 25% of schools have them, and that is with a recent surge. Many more spending limited funds on replacing grass with artificial turf, and some are already looking to install their second such fields as the first have worn out. Sponsorship rules vary widely across the state so that is not always a potential funding source.
The way our conferences and school districts prioritize their spending on these items is often discouraging to officials. We still have conferences with only 3-man (and sometimes 2-man) crews for freshman games, and there is no support for moving to 6-man or 7-man crews due to the lack of consistent commitment to paying for it across the state.
-
Illinois is no better when it comes to play clocks- we are at most about 25% of schools have them, and that is with a recent surge. Many more spending limited funds on replacing grass with artificial turf, and some are already looking to install their second such fields as the first have worn out. Sponsorship rules vary widely across the state so that is not always a potential funding source.
The way our conferences and school districts prioritize their spending on these items is often discouraging to officials. We still have conferences with only 3-man (and sometimes 2-man) crews for freshman games, and there is no support for moving to 6-man or 7-man crews due to the lack of consistent commitment to paying for it across the state.
Another possibility might be that visible (40 or 25 second clocks) is simply NOT a necessity. As for "Turf Fields" I was told that 2 reasons supporting the cost effectiveness of Turf is that the ability to play multiple sports on a single Turf field dramatically lowers the cost of long term playing field maintenance and durability as well as being far less affected by weather.
Although on field play-time management by field officials has been generally effective for generations, periodic "bad habits" creep into consistent administration, but increased focus and training concentration to emphasis consistency remains an effective means of correction and elimination, at far less cost and upheaval. an example would be the added attention schools have put into improved provision of effective "Chain Crews, Ball rotation, field security and sideline management that accompanied the interest if visible field clocks were added.
Sadly, recruiting shortfalls may be a larger impediment to larger field crews than cost considerations in many areas.
-
I'll take plastic grass and play clocks any time I can get 'em. (Just, please, please, let me talk to the PCO before the game.)
Next up: Referee's field microphone at every field/stadium. :)
-
I'll take plastic grass and play clocks any time I can get 'em. (Just, please, please, let me talk to the PCO before the game.)
Next up: Referee's field microphone at every field/stadium. :)
Not suggesting "Play Clocks" are necessarily evil, but when expectations, are allowed to keep advancing towards absolute perfection, in every minute detail, NFHS level football will cease being a necessary learning level of a game enjoyed and played by children, that offers unlimited progress and potential to a select few.
In addition to required "field microphones", heaven forbid "Instant Replay" becomes a requirement of NFHS level games.
-
I'll take plastic grass and play clocks any time I can get 'em. (Just, please, please, let me talk to the PCO before the game.)
Next up: Referee's field microphone at every field/stadium. :)
I think I've only ever been to two high schools that had a field microphone -- and one of them I've never been on a varsity night, and they don't use it for JV.
I don't think I've ever thought that the white hat really needed a microphone. The only time it might be useful is correcting the game clock, but somehow we manage.
-
I think I've only ever been to two high schools that had a field microphone -
I can only think of one right off the top of my head here in the west. There might be 2-3 more. Seems like some that did, stopped.
-
I think I've only ever been to two high schools that had a field microphone -- and one of them I've never been on a varsity night, and they don't use it for JV.
I don't think I've ever thought that the white hat really needed a microphone. The only time it might be useful is correcting the game clock, but somehow we manage.
The mic is a handy tool to communicate to the rabid fans. Have you ever had a situation where the crowd goes wild over a call or no call and you just wish you could make a quick announcement to explain?
-
The mic is a handy tool to communicate to the rabid fans. Have you ever had a situation where the crowd goes wild over a call or no call and you just wish you could make a quick announcement to explain?
Honestly, no. Any time there's rabid fans disagreeing with a call/no-call the explanation would have to devolve into a rules clinic about the differences between NFHS/NCAA/NFL rules. I don't think explaining how "the tackle box" is not a thing in high school would really quell the crowd.
Usually when the crowd reacts to us "not knowing the rules", I just think to myself, "Well, that's why I'm making the big bucks here"
-
I'll take plastic grass and play clocks any time I can get 'em. (Just, please, please, let me talk to the PCO before the game.)
Next up: Referee's field microphone at every field/stadium. :)
I like plastic grass most of the time, except when we have a 110 degree day here in Phoenix, then you better be real hydrated and prepared to change at halftime. Hard to believe how hot the plastic grass gets.
-
Honestly, no. Any time there's rabid fans disagreeing with a call/no-call the explanation would have to devolve into a rules clinic about the differences between NFHS/NCAA/NFL rules. I don't think explaining how "the tackle box" is not a thing in high school would really quell the crowd.
Usually when the crowd reacts to us "not knowing the rules", I just think to myself, "Well, that's why I'm making the big bucks here"
Absolutely agree, "rabid" fans are far more interested in being "rabid", and calling attention to themselves, than rule interpretation. Paying ANY attention to them is a "fool's errand". I always carry a couple of our Chapter business cards with me on the field, going to/from if confronted by some "rabid" fan, I've found presenting a card, with the polite message, "We're always looking for new good men (or women)" usually stops any further pontification.
I remember, a sadly fading time, when obnoxious people were simply ignored by others and eventually shunned into silence, rather than celebrated and encouraged to keep acting foolish. It worked pretty well then, I bet it would again.
-
Best clocks on the market right here.
https://ready-ref.com/play-clock/
-
Best clocks on the market right here.
https://ready-ref.com/play-clock/
I’m an architect and I work mostly with public school districts. I strongly recommend to all my clients that they avoid wireless game/play clock systems. Regardless of claims to the contrary, the wireless signals are highly subject to RF interference. Every time I go to a stadium/field and they tell me that, once in a while during every game, the clock (game or play clock) “acts up” and seems to stop momentarily, or flicker, or go blank, and then run down a few seconds very quickly, it turns out the clocks are wireless. Every time. I tell my clients they are better off to get hard wired clocks, even if it costs a bit more. With new construction projects, the additional cost is almost negligible - only the cost to run conduit from the clock positions to the pressbox (especially if they are going to have a plastic grass field), which is something we’d virtually always include in a project, anyway, regardless if they choose to use a wireless system. That way, when they become dissatisfied with the wireless, they can easily install a hard-wired system. Yeah, a bit more difficult and additional cost to retrofit into an existing field/stadium, but worth not having the aggravation of continual clock issues.
The RFI issue is quite real. If you use crew-comm radios, you have probably heard phones ringing, static, squealing, other conversations, etc., in your ears. Those same RF signals can wreak havoc on any form of wireless transmission systems.
-
Elvis is 100% correct. The wireless clocks work perfectly — until you put a couple of hundred (or thousand) fans in the stands all using cell phones, coaches using headsets, etc.
We had several schools in our area that had to do retrofits, and they were NOT happy.
-
I do agree with this statement from the ad:
"Clock Systems greatly improve the flow of football, lacrosse, and baseball games played in your stadium or field of play."
-
Elvis is 100% correct. The wireless clocks work perfectly — until you put a couple of hundred (or thousand) fans in the stands all using cell phones, coaches using headsets, etc.
We had several schools in our area that had to do retrofits, and they were NOT happy.
A county near me got sold on some wireless scoreboard system (not the ready-ref) for all the regional public schools (4 of them). They're all terrible like that with constant connectivity issues. They also operate using an iPad thing which means only one person can operate the entire scoreboard. There is a second device for the game clock, but you can't have a third person running the play clock too. Also, using a touchscreen device means there's no tactile button - you have to look at what you're hitting and you can accidentally "hit the button" without thinking since there's no required force.
Anyway, long story short, don't go that route.
-
Honestly, no. Any time there's rabid fans disagreeing with a call/no-call the explanation would have to devolve into a rules clinic about the differences between NFHS/NCAA/NFL rules. I don't think explaining how "the tackle box" is not a thing in high school would really quell the crowd.
Usually when the crowd reacts to us "not knowing the rules", I just think to myself, "Well, that's why I'm making the big bucks here"
I had pretty much the exact same thought. Honestly, in the few schools that we have that still use it, I really don't recall hearing the R's announcements. Maybe I tune it out.
As to the wireless clocks, the rival HS about 10 miles down the road has a wireless game clock that I swear skips sometimes.
-
I do agree with this statement from the ad:
"Clock Systems greatly improve the flow of football, lacrosse, and baseball games played in your stadium or field of play."
Speaking ONLY for Football, I agree "Game Time Visible Clocks" serve a distinct advantage to players, coaches, spectators & field officials, but what specific improvements do "play clocks" provide that a competent crew of game officials don't already provide, including their ability to adjust and respond to unanticipated, or temporary situations?
-
Speaking ONLY for Football, I agree "Game Time Visible Clocks" serve a distinct advantage to players, coaches, spectators & field officials, but what specific improvements do "play clocks" provide that a competent crew of game officials don't already provide, including their ability to adjust and respond to unanticipated, or temporary situations?
They greatly improve the flow of the game. That’s why I like that statement. That’s what it said.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
They greatly improve the flow of the game. That’s why I like that statement. That’s what it said.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Apologies, perhaps I was unclear in my request for further detail. Can you describe any specific benefits/advantages that "Visible PLAY clocks" provide that "greatly improve the flow of the game", that are not equally attainable from a competent field crew following current mechanics rigorously?
-
The improved flow of the game is the benefit. I don’t know how I could be more clear.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
A playclock is obviously more visible to players and officials. BJ doesn't have to look at a watch and a QB and his sideline don't have to search him out to watch him count. Less fouls lead to less stopping of the clock which leads to a more efficient flow of the game; but somehow I think you know that.
Not every innovation to the game is meant to &^%$ us over as officials.
-
Ask back judges if they'd prefer a playclock or keep it on the field. I'd expect the vast majority would choose to have a playclock. We have many teams who are slow tempo and don't snap the ball until there is 1 second left on the playclock. Without a visible playclock they won't know what the time is.
-
A playclock is obviously more visible to players and officials. BJ doesn't have to look at a watch and a QB and his sideline don't have to search him out to watch him count. Less fouls lead to less stopping of the clock which leads to a more efficient flow of the game; but somehow I think you know that.
Not every innovation to the game is meant to &^%$ us over as officials.
Just wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking something, actually important. Justifying spending bazillions of dollars retrofitting tens of thousands of HS playing fields across the country to avoid the handfulls of DOG fouls, or sidelines and QBs not being able to find BJs signaling details of play clock status, seems an overly expensive way to deal with some pretty innocuous, otherwise simply correctable, "issues".
The commitment of schools to provide more effective, consistent Chain Crews and Ball retrieval personnel is a welcome addition to reduce unnecessary "dead time" clock stoppages and excess other dead time delays during change of possession, after scores and change of periods could/should be easily corrected by emphasized mechanics and enforcement. Somehow, HS officiating crews (often smaller in number than some used today) were able to effectively eliminate the majority of unnecessary timing mishaps for the past 100+ years, without this ancillary equipment.
-
Just wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking something, actually important. Justifying spending bazillions of dollars retrofitting tens of thousands of HS playing fields across the country to avoid the handfulls of DOG fouls, or sidelines and QBs not being able to find BJs signaling details of play clock status, seems an overly expensive way to deal with some pretty innocuous, otherwise simply correctable, "issues".
The commitment of schools to provide more effective, consistent Chain Crews and Ball retrieval personnel is a welcome addition to reduce unnecessary "dead time" clock stoppages and excess other dead time delays during change of possession, after scores and change of periods could/should be easily corrected by emphasized mechanics and enforcement. Somehow, HS officiating crews (often smaller in number than some used today) were able to effectively eliminate the majority of unnecessary timing mishaps for the past 100+ years, without this ancillary equipment.
So why not eliminate game clocks as well?
-
Just wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking something, actually important. Justifying spending bazillions of dollars retrofitting tens of thousands of HS playing fields across the country to avoid the handfulls of DOG fouls, or sidelines and QBs not being able to find BJs signaling details of play clock status, seems an overly expensive way to deal with some pretty innocuous, otherwise simply correctable, "issues".
The commitment of schools to provide more effective, consistent Chain Crews and Ball retrieval personnel is a welcome addition to reduce unnecessary "dead time" clock stoppages and excess other dead time delays during change of possession, after scores and change of periods could/should be easily corrected by emphasized mechanics and enforcement. Somehow, HS officiating crews (often smaller in number than some used today) were able to effectively eliminate the majority of unnecessary timing mishaps for the past 100+ years, without this ancillary equipment.
Actually, this redundant argument you keep posting is great support for play clocks. Why do you think schools spend these bazillions or dollars on play clocks? They must be getting some benefit from it. It’s not the officials demanding them, it’s the schools.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
So why not eliminate game clocks as well?
Its what separates us from the lower lifeforms, to wit: soccer.
Sometime in the 1930's Al was probably posing that argument
-
Its what separates us from the lower lifeforms, to wit: soccer.
Sometime in the 1930's Al was probably posing that argument
Even back in the 1930s some people insisted on having the latest baubles, regardless of whether they made them look better, or accomplished anything. All I was asking was a simple question, "Does the visible play clock really add anything necessary to the game, that doesn't already exist. Other than "every other level uses them, so they must (somehow) be necessary" isn't very explanatory. I just thought I may be missing something important, apparently not.
-
Even back in the 1930s some people insisted on having the latest baubles, regardless of whether they made them look better, or accomplished anything. All I was asking was a simple question, "Does the visible play clock really add anything necessary to the game, that doesn't already exist. Other than "every other level uses them, so they must (somehow) be necessary" isn't very explanatory. I just thought I may be missing something important, apparently not.
Simple answer. Yes. They add necessary flow to the game. That’s why eveeevybody but you likes them.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Simple answer. Yes. They add necessary flow to the game. That’s why eveeevybody but you likes them.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk//quote]
I understand, in this election year, "ducking & dancing" has become fashionable, but I'm simply asking you for some/any specific examples of actually how, or why, play clocks, "are necessary, or significantly, add flow to the game", that would not be equally available through focused attention to the already effective mechanics currently practiced across the NFHS environment, including both Varsity and sub-Varsity levels (at virtually NO COST - or "flow" degradation)?
Using already available visible "play clocks" ALREADY INSTALLED FOR HIGHER LEVEL RULE CODES is fine (if teams agree), but retrofitting the entire NFHS universe is ridiculous.
-
Simple answer. Yes. They add necessary flow to the game. That’s why eveeevybody but you likes them.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk//quote]
I understand, in this election year, "ducking & dancing" has become fashionable, but I'm simply asking you for some/any specific examples of actually how, or why, play clocks, "are necessary, or significantly, add flow to the game", that would not be equally available through focused attention to the already effective mechanics currently practiced across the NFHS environment, including both Varsity and sub-Varsity levels (at virtually NO COST - or "flow" degradation)?
Using already available visible "play clocks" ALREADY INSTALLED FOR HIGHER LEVEL RULE CODES is fine (if teams agree), but retrofitting the entire NFHS universe is ridiculous.
Great. You have an opinion. So do I. I simply agree with the statement “visible play clocks improve the flow of the game.” I agree with that statement based on my personal experience. I have called games without play clocks and games with play clocks. The games with play clocks flowed better. That is all. Stop making it more than it is.
We all understand you do not like play clocks or the implementation of the :40. Fine. I’m ok with you not liking it. Don’t try to force your dislike on me though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
We all understand you do not like play clocks or the implementation of the :40. Fine. I’m ok with you not liking it. Don’t try to force your dislike on me though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's not that "I don't like" the concept of regulating time between downs more consistently, but necessitating visible play clocks in thousands of NFHS playing fields, when tightened focus on existing (workable) mechanics seems like a wildly cost effective, and immediately available alternative.
-
It's not that "I don't like" the concept of regulating time between downs more consistently, but necessitating visible play clocks in thousands of NFHS playing fields, when tightened focus on existing (workable) mechanics seems like a wildly cost effective, and immediately available alternative.
Teams that like a slow pace are hindered when they can't see the time remaining on the playclock.
-
Al, I'm not in favor of a mandate for play clocks but if the schools want them, I'm not standing in their way.
The right connections with the area soft drink bottler will take care of the expense in most cases anyway.
-
It's not that "I don't like" the concept of regulating time between downs more consistently, but necessitating visible play clocks in thousands of NFHS playing fields, when tightened focus on existing (workable) mechanics seems like a wildly cost effective, and immediately available alternative.
We are having a comprehension problem here. Nobody suggests you don’t like regulating consistency between the downs. From what I’ve read I would say you are very much in favor of consistency.
What we have is a method issue. You believe the key to consistency is training, mechanics, and application of principles long accepted in the profession. I don’t disagree that those things could help football games flow better and be more consistent between downs.
The problem is that the rest of the football world has decided the BEST way to help the flow and provide consistency between downs is by way of visible clocks and the implementation of the :40.
There’s an old saying I use to check my self and my opinions: when your opinion goes against the opinion of everybody else, more times than not it’s not everybody else’s opinion that is wrong. This may apply here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Teams that like a slow pace are hindered when they can't see the time remaining on the playclock.
Unfortunately, COVID wiped out the 2020 NFHS season in our area, postponed it, as possible for Spring 21 (which seems highly doubtful) so my thoughts are related to existing mechanics, which dealt with the issue you raise. Mechanic related to the previously Referee public (whistle/chop) RTP declaration: BJ would monitor the 25 second countdown, at 10 seconds remaining, raise one arm straight up, at 5 seconds visibly signal individual per-second count down for the benefit of the signal caller (and/or sideline).
Mechanic seemed effective, as DOG has NOT been a recurring problem, and would/should not require serious modification (if any) to accommodate a 40 second interval, although providing some sort of a revision of an RFP signal would be helpful (to everybody) and address both venues with/without visible play clocks, which will likely take multiple decades to universally provide.
-
The problem is that the rest of the football world has decided the BEST way to help the flow and provide consistency between downs is by way of visible clocks and the implementation of the :40.
There’s an old saying I use to check my self and my opinions: when your opinion goes against the opinion of everybody else, more times than not it’s not everybody else’s opinion that is wrong. This may apply here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eureka, I think you may have uncovered the real thorn here. There is NO universal "Football World", there are 3 separate, independent although closely related, progressive "Football Planets" each designed to support the individual requirements, purposes and distinct needs of their unique constituents. Each unique higher level has distinct objectives requiring special handling, which often (BUT NOT ALWAYS) can be helpful to lower levels.
What works well for the goose, doesn't always make sense for the gander, but the two can learn (or remember) from each other to live in perfect harmony.
-
Eureka, I think you may have uncovered the real thorn here. There is NO universal "Football World", there are 3 separate, independent although closely related, progressive "Football Planets" each designed to support the individual requirements, purposes and distinct needs of their unique constituents. Each unique higher level has distinct objectives requiring special handling, which often (BUT NOT ALWAYS) can be helpful to lower levels.
What works well for the goose, doesn't always make sense for the gander, but the two can learn (or remember) from each other to live in perfect harmony.
Well, using your metaphor, there is a “football universe” made up of three football planets. Each one of those planets has decided play clocks and the :40 is the best way to regulate time between downs, thereby improving the flow and providing more consistency.
OMG, somebody post a rule question. I’m going nuts.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Well, using your metaphor, there is a “football universe” made up of three football planets. Each one of those planets has decided play clocks and the :40 is the best way to regulate time between downs, thereby improving the flow and providing more consistency.
OMG, somebody post a rule question. I’m going nuts.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
There are ALWAYS different ideas about how best to "Skin a cat", let's see how well accepted and practical this one turns out to be. It's been over 50 years since visible GAME clocks were introduced, and there are still locations choosing to play without them. It seems despite even the most sincere best efforts, sometimes, "ONE size NEVER/EVER fits all, at least well", and not everybody is willing to pay the price of buying a Jaguar, although they'd like the luxury of the ride.
Even "Football Planets" change, alter, revise, adjust ideas (rules) EVERY year, because "The road to Hell is often paved with really good intentions", that don't seem to work, or be as necessary, as well as FIRST presumed. The question is not just "a 40 second play interval", but how to rationally/practically/consistently manage it.
Nuclear bombs are an indisputably effective means of eliminating rodent problems from an area, but would they be practical?
-
I've spent way too much energy on this insane argument, but I can't let this last sentence go unanswered. Calling the implementation of visible play clocks and the :40 a nuclear bomb is asinine..
-
I've spent way too much energy on this insane argument, but I can't let this last sentence go unanswered. Calling the implementation of visible play clocks and the :40 a nuclear bomb is asinine..
I didn't suggest that play clocks were nuclear bombs, rather that "overkill", and/or over presumption, can be problematic, YOU made that direct equation.
Play clocks are not "the Devil", but they just as likely are not the ULTIMATE, EXCLUSIVE, ONLY PRACTICAL answer to the question of improved "play time" management. For 50+ years there have been issues with consistently providing competent "GAME Clock" operators. Many areas have chosen to deal with those issues by providing assigned certified officials as Timers, other areas by increased training and/or certification of non-official Timers.
As I understand, both NCAA and NFL games utilize separate (trained and/or certified) Game and Play clock operators. Some (NFHS) schools prefer using a single operator to mange BOTH functions (personal opinion: "An accident waiting to happen").
Serious consideration weighing; ACTUALLY how big a problem (@ NFHS level), how significant the improvement provided, the cost of implementation & ongoing necessary operation including competent manpower, the value of the benefit provided, the comparable cost of other available remedies & possible solutions are viable alternatives worth considering BEFORE adapting the MOST expensive, PERMANENT solution.
-
I didn't suggest that play clocks were nuclear bombs, rather that "overkill", and/or over presumption, can be problematic, YOU made that direct equation.
You do realize how Metaphors work in the English language, don't you? You used the metaphor to suggest a nuclear bomb would be overkill in the quest to get rid of rats. I'm pretty sure you were using that analogy as a comparison to the idea that the play clock is overkill in the quest to add consistency to the game. In fact, you alluded to this yourself in your response. I simply used your use of this metaphor in my rebuttal. No, you didn't suggest that play clocks are nuclear bombs, but you did suggest that they are overkill. My goodness, Are you that fond of circular reasoning?
Play clocks are not "the Devil", but they just as likely are not the ULTIMATE, EXCLUSIVE, ONLY PRACTICAL answer to the question of improved "play time" management.
nobody has ever suggested such. This is a strawman argument you have concocted to keep this insane discussion going.
For 50+ years there have been issues with consistently providing competent "GAME Clock" operators. Many areas have chosen to deal with those issues by providing assigned certified officials as Timers, other areas by increased training and/or certification of non-official Timers.
Ok. not sure how this fits into this discussion, but whatever.
As I understand, both NCAA and NFL games utilize separate (trained and/or certified) Game and Play clock operators. Some (NFHS) schools prefer using a single operator to mange BOTH functions (personal opinion: "An accident waiting to happen").
Ok. See above.
Serious consideration weighing; ACTUALLY how big a problem (@ NFHS level), how significant the improvement provided, the cost of implementation & ongoing necessary operation including competent manpower, the value of the benefit provided, the comparable cost of other available remedies & possible solutions are viable alternatives worth considering BEFORE adapting the MOST expensive, PERMANENT solution.
Once again, the only one who seems to be concerned about this enormous cost and seemingly irreversible (it's really not) decision to use play clocks and the 40 seems to be you. "If you have a problem with everybody, everybody is not the problem."
-
Actually, I'm probably the ONLY one dumb enough to try and tactfully suggest that YOUR personal conclusion/opinion does NOT somehow become binding on everyone else. You don't, however, get to rework MY words into what YOU have decided they should mean. Apologies for any confusion I may cause, but if you're not clear about my meaning, I'd be happy to clarify if asked to.
Retrofitting thousands of NFHS venues with play clocks may somehow prove to be the ultimate solution, to what currently seems like an otherwise, relatively minor, somewhat inconsistent problem, but I seriously doubt it, and all the barking that it is some "Holy Grail" isn't going to alter reality. Timing "play duration" currently is, and has long been effectively managed (with intermittent problems) by game field officials. Perhaps a review of current mechanics to strengthen the existing procedures and responsibilities might be appropriate, and remain substantially more cost effective, to produce desired improvement.
I do agree that this discussion has far exceeded it's value, and hope ALL potential solutions will, at least be considered, before leaping off a "Retrofit all Venues" cliff.
Since you asked, specifically, about my mention of the issue of dual vs separate "Clock Operators", I was simply adding the reality that this is an actual issue, currently in dispute, that involves the ongoing cost and management of dual timing displays, that could be eliminated by increased focus on existing on-field mechanics.
-
Actually, I'm probably the ONLY one dumb enough to try and tactfully suggest that YOUR personal conclusion/opinion does NOT somehow become binding on everyone else. You don't get to rework my words into what you have decided you mean. .
Amazing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Would someone please use their Amazon account to order AL a new supply of Keyboard Kaopectate? I’ll gladly reimburse them.
-
Would someone please use their Amazon account to order AL a new supply of Keyboard Kaopectate? I’ll gladly reimburse them.
Sorry Bama, but a far better cure for stubborn, and somewhat arrogant insistence, that one way is the ONLY way, is rational explanation of proven alternatives. Of course it's ALWAYS up to the recipient whether to consider the additional information, or automatically reject it as blasphemy. For some it takes more detail than others and more evidence is necessary.
You can lead a horse to water, but it's the horse's decision whether to drink, or not.
-
Sorry Bama, but a far better cure for stubborn, and somewhat arrogant insistence, that one way is the ONLY way, is rational explanation of proven alternatives. Of course it's ALWAYS up to the recipient whether to consider the additional information, or automatically reject it as blasphemy. For some it takes more detail than others and more evidence is necessary.
You can lead a horse to water, but it's the horse's decision whether to drink, or not.
Had a seminary professor who said there was a solution to that, salt his oats.
-
Looks like this topic may have lived it’s life span