Shot Clock in High School?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Again, I am not asking that you cut corners to the point that you are making serious errors.

Oh yes you are. Remember this?

With a running clock, I would rather the refs keep things moving so that the players get as much playing time as possible. Forcing switches may be good for you, but these games are for the players. ***Anything that adds to the dead ball time with a running clock is bad for the players.*** You should adapt to these situations to help the game keep moving.

Like Camron said, if a partner tries to be a nice guy and rushes to get the ball in he's gonna wait. If a player rushes me ("C'mon man gimme the ball!") he's gonna wait. If a coach complains I'm going too slowly he's gonna really wait. The game goes at my pace. Not your pace. Not the players pace.

[Hawks Coach]

And how does switching prevent an error? I am obviously missing something here.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
And how does switching prevent an error? I am obviously missing something here.

I switch because I take pride in what I do & in my performance, even in the lowest level least meaningful games. Switching takes zero time, what takes time is making sure everything is set for the ball to be made live. And I thought we had agreed this is important.

[Hawks Coach]

As I read your "quote" of me, I am guessing you are centered on the word "anything." I apologize for loose wording, and have tried multiple times since that post to clarify my meaning. I am not suggesting that necessary dead ball activity be eliminated (e.g., reporting a foul). I am suggesting that it is possible to move dead balls along at a faster pace in running clock games without the quality of the game suffering. If you refuse to do so, I wouldn't want you doing these games for me.

I have never requested that a ref speed things up. My players have never requested this of a ref. But it is maddening to see some plod through a game like it is a normal stop clock game, while others see ways to keep the game moving. You are telling refs that move things along in these games that they are wrong - I am suggesting just the opposite. And remember, these games mean little in terms of result on the scoreboard. We are talking off-season activity, frequently with no awards involved - just a chance to play. These games are, and have always been, about opportunities to play for the players involved.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach

I am suggesting that it is possible to move dead balls along at a faster pace in running clock games without the quality of the game suffering.

I'm not sure I know what this means

If you refuse to do so, I wouldn't want you doing these games for me.

But I know what this means and I'll let my supervisors know I have some free'ed up dates.

[Nevadaref]

When you have a summer league or tournament that is going to using a running clock, the organizer needs to make it clear to whomever is in charge of the officials for the event what he wants from them.
If the organizer wants the game to be for the benefit of the players and coaches and hence give them maximum playing time, then the officials should not switch very often and should not do many of the mechanics that should be done in a stop clock game, such as going over to the table to report. Or better yet, just play stop clock and reduce the halves to 16 minutes each.
If the organizer wants the game to allow for the officials to work on improving themselves as well, then it should be made clear to the coaches and players in the rules packet that the officials will be switching and doing full reporting mechanics, etc., so don't bother asking them to hurry for your sake.

Either way is fine, but it needs to be made clear up front. That way if an official is worried that tossing mechanics out the window will hurt his game, then he can make the choice not to work the games. If too many officials in a given area feel this way, then they may not be able to find enough to cover the event and the organizer will have to compromise.
Personally, I believe that I am smart enough to not need the repetitive motion of the mechanics and switching. I can turn it on and off at will. So if I want to do a few running clock games to pick up some extra money, then I do them for the players and coaches, but I want to get better and work on my mechanics, I tell the local assignor to only give me the games that are stop clock in that week or month or whatever.
By the way, I don't ever worry about impressing someone at a running clock league or event because anyone that I am going to want to impress is going to be intelligent enough to know that a lot of corners are cut in these events. Who would evaluate someone's mechanics in a running clock game anyway?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Who would evaluate someone's mechanics in a running clock game anyway?

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

There are more things evaluators in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy

[Mregor]

IMO, you don't need to concentrate on all mechanics at once in these running clock t-ments. I personally don't switch on every foul in these games. Usually around here we'll do from 3-5 of these off-season games in a row and I don't want to switch on every foul. You can still concentrate on mechanics; just not all of them at once. Try concentrating on off-ball action or try concentrating on being in proper position by anticipating what the offense will run (anticipate the play, not the call). There's a multitude of things you can work on. Concentrate on traveling. Pick your weekness and work on it. Just my opinion...

Mregor

[firedoc]

On Long Island (NY) we have been using a 35 second shot clock at the high school level for a number of years. It has not been a problem and the clock rarely goes off. I think that this is because the HS players don't have the patience to wait long enough for the clock to reach 35 seconds. I think that I have had only 1 shot clock violation in the 3-4 years that we have been using it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
And how does switching prevent an error? I am obviously missing something here.

Perhaps not an error, but it generally ensures that both teams are getting a balance set of calls from the officials. If I dont' switch and I'm calling something a little differently or seeing something different than my partner (often the case), one team will get penalized on one end of the court while the other gets away with the same thing on the other end. Now that is trouble brewing. A player of coach for the team that is not getting the calls is going to lose their patience when they sense the persistent difference. This is the entire purpose of switching and is just as likely...perhaps more likely...to happen in a typical running clock game.

[johnSandlin]

I would not be a bit surprised if high school does go a shot clock within the next five to six years. I know a few school districts in northern Michigan that are in the process of building new gymnasiums and on the new baskets they are putting game clock/shot clock set ups on them in case we ever do go to a shot clock rule high school basketball.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by johnSandlin
I would not be a bit surprised if high school does go a shot clock within the next five to six years. I know a few school districts in northern Michigan that are in the process of building new gymnasiums and on the new baskets they are putting game clock/shot clock set ups on them in case we ever do go to a shot clock rule high school basketball.

For every new school built with the shot clocks, there are probably a 100 without. What's the average age of the HS's in any given area? If we get there by a natrual transition (assuming all new schools do it---most will not) it will take 20-30 years.

Hearing comments directly from the NFHS meeting minutes, it's not going to happen for a long time for many reasons. There's no compelling reason to have it aside from being like the NCAA or NBA. It doesn't improve the typical HS game. But primarily, the cost. There are a lot of small schools around the US for which this would be a dramatic cost.

[Bobby]

Keep in mind a 24-second clock is used in youth play elsewhere around the world (FIBA) except Canada, where it is 30 or 35 seconds.

A FIBA-spec (Art 3.5.7.2) game/shot/light unit (such as the Daktronics BB-2128 and 2130 series) costs $2,700. A shot clock only unit costs $1,200-$1,600 for the well-known brands. A European unit (Favero.com) costs €350. Such information is based on prices without shipping.

Furthermore, if you put the shot clocks on the floor, it would be slightly cheaper than to mount them on the basket for established buildings. Again, the use of the FIBA rule instead of the NCAA rule would be feasible. The NCAA and NBA require the clocks mounted on top of the basket. Gymnasia which have the clocks mounted on the walls are in violation of NCAA, NBA, and FIBA rules.

In 2000, FIBA standardised the legal positions of a shot clock in Article 3.4.2.2 to three legal positions. A 2000 rule book will show the legal mounting points.

1. Two (2) display units mounted either above and behind each backboard and at a distance of between 30 cm and 50 cm.

2. Four (4) display units placed on the floor in all four (4) corners, 2 m behind each end line.

3. Two (2) display units placed on the floor at diagonally opposite corners. The display unit to the left of the scorer's table shall be placed at the nearest corner thereto. Both units shall be 2 m behind each end line and 2 m in from the sideline extended.

Diagram 9 of the 2000 FIBA rule book shows the exact mounting points.