This one is so weak . Total stretch for these weak ass jokes . <| sep |> Basically , I ' m pissed as anyone else , bc the player plays off the info they have , but once you go to the replay , you can ' t really say ' Well it ' s only . 1 off so well give it to you '. Right , and that seems to be the problem for this protest . Once the replay was triggered , there weren ' t really any other outcomes . They go back to the exact frame Cousins touches the ball , start the clock and then either call Terrence making it in time or not . Based on past protests even if Ross did make it in time and they got that part of the call wrong , it doesn ' t mean the protest will be upheld because the rule was being applied correctly but a bad judgement call was made . The main issue I had with it is what you get at in the second half of your post , the clock did start before it got to Ross so who gets to decide what ' s a reasonable delay or not ? My understanding of the current rule is once they have triggered the review on the basis of a clock malfunction and all they need to do so is to believe there was one even if when they go to the replay they find that the clock actually only started only 0 . 10 . 2 late they are still going to wind it back and start from exactly when it was touched , even though that is the delay on the vast majority of plays and never considered a malfunction .