:crazy: Just when I thought that we were making some progress, you start posting nonsense again.
Here's what you wrote, again "You made a critical error. 2:06 could potentially be anywhere from 2:06.01 to 2:06.99."
How many times do I have to repeat myself? I already told you that it was written out incorrectly. I wrote the tenths out front because you obviously didn't get that the tenths needed to be counted. Here is the proof. I wrote:
You say that the whistle came 2-3 seconds after the clock stopped. That is impossible. I just proved that the clock was stopped after 5.9 seconds, and we know that we heard the whistle after 6.3 seconds. That is a difference of 4-tenths of a second, not 2 to 3 seconds.
And you responded:
You are wrong again. Let me prove it to you in ur words. If the play took 6.3 seconds then from 2:06:00 minus 6:3 seconds is 1:59:70.
You obviously didn't know that 1:59.70 reads 2:00 on an NFL clock and that 1:59.70 is only 4-tenths away from reading 2:01 on an NFL clock. The math backed up exactly what I was saying and you posted as if it didn't because you didn't know any better.
I don't even care if you want to harp on the tenths being written incorrectly (out front for your benefit) it does not change my argument of 4-tenths versus your argument of 2 to 3 seconds.
Wrong. From the time the returner catches the ball, to the time clock ticks down to 2:05 is .8 seconds total. Minus the reaction time, and the time the returner took to take the ball out of the EZ, we only have .5 seconds. That means we only had 2:05:50 on the clock before the start of the play. The play took 6.9 seconds. 2:05:50 minus 6.9 is 1:58:6, or 1:59 on the NFL clock (which stopped at 2:01). Difference between 2:01 and 1:59 is 2 seconds, which backs up my claim of 2-3 seconds.
You can't pass off assumptions as facts. You have no clue when the clock operator actually started the clock. We can make all kinds of assumptions like that if we want to. Maybe there was 2:06.00 and he started it 2-tenths too early. Maybe he let the clock run longer than it should have on the Jets FG attempt and there was only 2:05.3 and he started it 5 tenths too late on the KO return. All of that would add up to the 8-tenths you are seeing, but what actually happened can not be proven. All you know is that when you think the clock should have been started, .8 seconds passed before it changed to 2:05. I don't need to make assumptions about how much time was actually on the clock and exactly when he started and stopped it. I know how much time should be on the clock based on the Jets FG attempt, and I know when the clock should start and stop based on the rules. That is all we need to know.
I would like to know if the clock operator was even looking at that ref and not paying attention to a different ref? I could care less, but we do know when the whistle came in.
You are arguing that the clock stopped 2 to 3 seconds before it should have. Are you now trying to argue that it is not reasonable for the clock operator to stop the clock when the official was giving the signal because he might have been looking somewhere else? Ridiculous!
You've been whining about tenths of seconds. I've maintained my 2-3 second claim.
You foolishly maintained your 2 to 3 second claim even when I showed you that it was impossible since the play took 6.3 seconds and that 5.9 seconds can pass from 2:06 to 2:01 before the clock changes to 2:00. When you finally figured out that your claim of 2 to 3 seconds was impossible at 6.3 seconds, you started to make up stuff and increased the time of the play to 6.9 seconds and decreased the time on the clock down to 5.5 with your assumptions about the clock operator.
Repost alert: From the time the returner catches the ball, to the time clock ticks down to 2:05 is .8 seconds total. Minus the reaction time, and the time the returner took to take the ball out of the EZ, we only have .5 seconds. That means we only had 2:05:50 on the clock before the start of the play. The play took 6.9 seconds. 2:05:50 minus 6.9 is 1:58:6, or 1:59 on the NFL clock (which stopped at 2:01). Difference between 2:01 and 1:59 is 2 seconds, which backs up my claim of 2-3 seconds.
You still don't get it. If you want to get an accurate time, you need to count the tenths and not only what the NFL clock reads. Even when you incorrectly increase the time of the play to 6.9 seconds and you decrease the time (with assumptions) on the clock to 5.5 seconds, you still can't make it to your 2 to 3 seconds claim. It is 1.4 seconds. You still need 0.6 to 1.6 more to make it to your 2 to 3 second claim.
U math is weak, because you are not even trying to figure out if the clock read 2:05:05 or 2:06:00 without anything to back it up with. I've backed it up with my claim. See above.
Your assumptions do not back up anything. We can't prove how much time was actually on the clock becasue we can't prove exactly when the clock operator started and stopped the clock. What we do know is how much time should be on the clock based on the play before and when the clock should start and stop based on the rules.
You can eliminate the variable of the clock operator by starting the timer at 2:05. We know there is a full 2:05.00 on the clock since we can see it go from 2:06 to 2:05 right in front of our eyes. Correct? From 2:05.00, 4.9 seconds can pass, and the clock will still read 2:01. Agreed?
I included a timer with tenths that starts at 2:05 on the video. The timer actually starts 1-tenth too soon, but it doesn't really make a difference to my argument of 4-tenths versus your argument of 2 to 3 seconds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=245ub9bK7t0
As you can see in the video, he clearly has possession at 4.6 seconds.
That ^ still leaves 3-tenths (actually 4-tenths since I started the timer 1-tenth too soon) for the clock to be stopped at 2:01. The official is most likely waving his arms at this point. You can see the official when he first comes in to view waving his arms at 5.2 here:
Since I started the clock 1-tenth too soon, it should really read 5.1 which means he is giving the signal within 2-tenths of the clock reading 2:01. On my PC, the audio of the whistle lines up perfectly with the clock stopping at 5.4, but for some reason the sound is slightly delayed after uploading it to youtube. In the youtube video, it looks like the clock stops a split second before you hear the whistle blow, but it does not on my PC. Regardless, I started the clock 1-tenth too soon and even with the sound delay, it is no more than a 1-tenth difference, so we are still in the 4-tenths range (Far from the 2 to 3 second range) of the clock reading 2:01 at the time of the whistle.
However, there is no need to go to the whistle since we clearly see possession before that, and the official giving the signal before the whistle is blown.
This should end this silly debate, but I am sure you will come up with something.
