USA Basketball Recommendations.

[biz2]

Some very good: smaller basketball, lower hoop, no 3's, no zone all for younger kids (11 yo and younger)

Some I don't care for: Adoption of FIBA rules for HS, 24 second shot clock for HS. (too short. I would advocate for 30 or 35 seconds)

[sdoebler]

Good suggestions overall. I think that a shot clock needs to be common than it is today. It was touched on a bit at the end in terms of cost, I haven't done any research but my guess is that baskets in which the height can be adjusted would bear a larger cost for facilities. Most likely difficult for smaller gyms or schools. I think that the shot clock usage also is hindered by costs, that is our states excuse every year.

[#olderthanilook]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

Good suggestions overall. I think that a shot clock needs to be common than it is today. It was touched on a bit at the end in terms of cost, I haven't done any research but my guess is that baskets in which the height can be adjusted would bear a larger cost for facilities. Most likely difficult for smaller gyms or schools. I think that the shot clock usage also is hindered by costs, that is our states excuse every year.

I would think it would be a pain to adequately staff the table with someone that knows and consistently runs a shot clock correctly.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

Good suggestions overall. I think that a shot clock needs to be common than it is today. It was touched on a bit at the end in terms of cost, I haven't done any research but my guess is that baskets in which the height can be adjusted would bear a larger cost for facilities. Most likely difficult for smaller gyms or schools. I think that the shot clock usage also is hindered by costs, that is our states excuse every year.

There are clip on hoops that attach to the 10' hoops. My kids played on them at the Y when they were little.

Yes, that adds costs, but I think it is a huge value. With a 10' hoop, young kids are throwing the ball, not shooting.

[todd66]

personally, I think the shot clock ruins high school basketball. It takes a lot of strategy out of the game. No shot clock emphasizes ball control and free throw shooting. 2 areas that are disappearing from the game.

[LRZ]

HS shot clocks and kiddie-height baskets/smaller basketballs are very different issues.

I like the idea of lower baskets and smaller basketballs for little kids. I've ref'ed enough games with scores like 12-4, and making it easier to shoot and score would make for better skills development and thus better games, imo.

Shot clocks seem to me a solution in search of a problem. Nothing wrong with basketball being a game of tactics and strategy. Spread offense, running the clock? Learn to trap, force turnovers.

[todd66]

Could not agree with LRZ more. Do not change the essence of the game. Make the changes that will instill proper mechanics and promote playing the game fundamentally.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by LRZ

HS shot clocks and kiddie-height baskets/smaller basketballs are very different issues.

I like the idea of lower baskets and smaller basketballs for little kids. I've ref'ed enough games with scores like 12-4, and making it easier to shoot and score would make for better skills development and thus better games, imo.

Shot clocks seem to me a solution in search of a problem. Nothing wrong with basketball being a game of tactics and strategy. Spread offense, running the clock? Learn to trap, force turnovers.

Agree on the lower baskets and smaller balls.

With all due respect, I disagree on shot clocks. I believe that a shot clock SHOULD be adopted, and not for the strategic reasons that many coaches want it for. A shot clock should reduce deliberate (note: not intentional, because that is a specific term in the rules) fouls at the end of the game, because fouling actually creates a disadvantage for the fouling team. Fouling does stop the clock, but the shot clock will reset, giving the offense a new possession and a better chance to run out the shot (or game, depending on time remaining) clock.

If teams do not foul near the end of the game, we as officials do not have to guess on which deliberate fouls to rule as intentional fouls, and which deliberate fouls to rule as common fouls. This will eliminate the need for NFHS to constantly put intentional fouls as a point of emphasis every year, because intentional fouls would then only happen in excessive contact/dangerous play situations, or if a player did not try to play the ball. In addition, fewer fouls would mean a safer game, because players who are not fouled will not be as likely to retaliate or talk trash to other players. Officials' jobs would be easier, because they will not have to rule every touch as a foul in the last few minutes, as is currently the accepted practice in non-shot clock games.

I may have limited experience as a basketball official (3 years overall, 1 season at the high school sub-varsity level), but I have worked games both with and without the shot clock, and have noticed that teams who play with a shot clock play basketball throughout all 32 minutes of the game, instead of just for 28 minutes. I have also noticed fewer deliberate fouls with a shot clock than without a shot clock in my games, whether in boys or girls games, whether in urban public school games or private school games.

A 30-second shot clock would be the easiest to use for high school games, because a visible 10-second count would not be required (if the official sees that the ball is still in the backcourt with 20 seconds on the shot clock, there is a violation) while the shot clock is on. This would free the official to concentrate on a wider area of the court in transition. This is why I would recommend a 30-second shot clock for high school play. If high school chose to go with a 24-second shot clock, then a visual count would be needed, because the FIBA/NBA backcourt count is 8 seconds, not 10.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

A 30-second shot clock would be the easiest to use for high school games, because a visible 10-second count would not be required (if the official sees that the ball is still in the backcourt with 20 seconds on the shot clock, there is a violation) while the shot clock is on. This would free the official to concentrate on a wider area of the court in transition. This is why I would recommend a 30-second shot clock for high school play. If high school chose to go with a 24-second shot clock, then a visual count would be needed, because the FIBA/NBA backcourt count is 8 seconds, not 10.

Why would it matter? 24 second clock, the violation occurs at 14 (or 16 if you have an 8 second count). Regardless of the starting point of the clock and the length of the count, I'd hope that most officials would be able to recognize whatever time it is that creates the violation.

That said, I think 30 is way too short for many HS games. 30 would be fine for upper level varsity, but a lot of teams just don't have the skill to make it a good game with a 30 second clock. It would be a game of turnovers and desperation heaves/airballs. For HS, 40 or 45 seconds would be about right for ALL games.

[constable]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Agree on the lower baskets and smaller balls.

With all due respect, I disagree on shot clocks. I believe that a shot clock SHOULD be adopted, and not for the strategic reasons that many coaches want it for. A shot clock should reduce deliberate (note: not intentional, because that is a specific term in the rules) fouls at the end of the game, because fouling actually creates a disadvantage for the fouling team. Fouling does stop the clock, but the shot clock will reset, giving the offense a new possession and a better chance to run out the shot (or game, depending on time remaining) clock.

If teams do not foul near the end of the game, we as officials do not have to guess on which deliberate fouls to rule as intentional fouls, and which deliberate fouls to rule as common fouls. This will eliminate the need for NFHS to constantly put intentional fouls as a point of emphasis every year, because intentional fouls would then only happen in excessive contact/dangerous play situations, or if a player did not try to play the ball. In addition, fewer fouls would mean a safer game, because players who are not fouled will not be as likely to retaliate or talk trash to other players. Officials' jobs would be easier, because they will not have to rule every touch as a foul in the last few minutes, as is currently the accepted practice in non-shot clock games.

I may have limited experience as a basketball official (3 years overall, 1 season at the high school sub-varsity level), but I have worked games both with and without the shot clock, and have noticed that teams who play with a shot clock play basketball throughout all 32 minutes of the game, instead of just for 28 minutes. I have also noticed fewer deliberate fouls with a shot clock than without a shot clock in my games, whether in boys or girls games, whether in urban public school games or private school games.

A 30-second shot clock would be the easiest to use for high school games, because a visible 10-second count would not be required (if the official sees that the ball is still in the backcourt with 20 seconds on the shot clock, there is a violation) while the shot clock is on. This would free the official to concentrate on a wider area of the court in transition. This is why I would recommend a 30-second shot clock for high school play. If high school chose to go with a 24-second shot clock, then a visual count would be needed, because the FIBA/NBA backcourt count is 8 seconds, not 10.

We don't use a visible count anymore.

If you can't subtract 8 from 24, then you have a problem.

Our HS uses a modified FIBA- they still allow you to call timeout from the floor whereas real FIBA does not. They also have a 35 second shot clock with a full reset on everything which is vastly different from real FIBA.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by LRZ

HS shot clocks and kiddie-height baskets/smaller basketballs are very different issues.

I like the idea of lower baskets and smaller basketballs for little kids. I've ref'ed enough games with scores like 12-4, and making it easier to shoot and score would make for better skills development and thus better games, imo.

Shot clocks seem to me a solution in search of a problem. Nothing wrong with basketball being a game of tactics and strategy. Spread offense, running the clock? Learn to trap, force turnovers.

I have played and reffed in both shot-clock and non-shot clock states. If you think shot clocks aren't needed you are about 30 years behind the time. Varsity games need 35 and fresh/jv need about 40. You can still spread the offense and play basketball. But most of this is so dated it's scary.

[LRZ]

Well, that's one opinion. The powers that be have tinkered with the pace of play for years. Remember the hashmarks, where we would step in and command, "Play!"?

Maybe it depends on where you find the beauty of the game.

[SNIPERBBB]

Just say no to "no zone". It does not promote good defense at all and just creates arguments in every league I've done where one coach teaches a help side defense and nobody else has figured out how to teach it. And your stopping the game every possession when the kid with no attention span drifts away from his man.

Drop the age for the big kid rules to 11+, at least on the boys side.