Worked a freshman/jv type deal down on the south side of town. brand new school, brand new gym. I got there really early cuz i didnt know what traffic was going to be like walked in the gym met the game administrator and noticed shot clocks on the back walls on the main floor (3 floors in one gym- its pretty crazy). Anyway. I didnt think shot clocks were used in High School. ESH! THat could make for a long night.

Games went well though. Had one "fight" no real swings taken but my partner and I ejected the two players. I don't think I want to work these 2 20 min running clock excpet last 2 minutes kind of tournaments. Dead ball mechanics and foul reporting get tossed out of the window which is why I drove this far to work a game, Not only to see some basketball again but to work on slowing down on reporting and fouls and such. I managed to make some progress though. Wasnt a total loss for 15 bucks a game.

I agree on the mechanics being tossed on running time
 

I ran some leagues this summer to work on 3 man mechanics. 2 20 minutes halfs. So, we were always hurrying to keep the ball moving. When I started with clinics a few weeks ago, I had some bad habits I needed to work on.

Rotation on fouls were the first to go.

Its getting better though and I will be ready when the season starts.

Re: I agree on the mechanics being tossed on running time
 

You guys are making a HUGE mistake. Use these games to work on your mechanics. Let the players wait. Force switches on fouls with your partner.

Shot Clocks - New Rule Ever, Don't Think So
 

Funny you should bring up the shot clock subject. Last night at our state(Maryland)interpretation meeting it was asked as it usually is every year when the boys will be using a shot clock due to the fact that the girls in MD already use one and will this ever be a rule proposed by the Fed. The answer was that this subject was recently brought up in Indianapolis at the meetings. It appears there only a handful of states which currently use a shot clock in some way whether it be for boys or girls, and the majority of the other states who do not currently use it don't see a need for it, so that the most you may see from the fed in the coming years it to make shot clocks a per state adoption rule just as they have done with this new "mercy rule", but probably they will never change it definitively to the entire country.

Re: Shot Clocks - New Rule Ever, Don't Think So
 

I think it's more of a money issue than a rules issue. With funding the way it is in my state - Oregon - having all high schools buy shot clocks would result in a huge outcry from the teachers who were recently laid off, not to mention parents.

Mark your probably right about the cost, especially with the reasons mentioned in your state with regard to the teachers. However here in Maryland we already have it for girls and with regard to money, the individual counties in their infinite wisdom won't pay for 3-person officiating, but they are willing to put the expensive "precision timing system" you see for the D1 games in many of our local high schools. I don't get it.

[Edited by Ref42 on Oct 14th, 2003 at 11:16 AM]

I'm with you Ref42. I find it very funny how we use the shot clock for the girls and not for the boys in MD. It's not like the schools don't own the clocks! We also have the same problem with not being able to introduce 3 person mechanics. I guess that's why we aren't administrators!

Most of the private schools in the northern VA area use a shot clock. Not aware of any public schools using it.

Re: Re: I agree on the mechanics being tossed on running time
 

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.

Re: Re: Re: I agree on the mechanics being tossed on running time
 

Uhmmmmm.....no. The game moves at my pace.

Not exactly Dan. Unfortunately, in these games the clock keeps moving regardless of what pace you work. If you waste precious seconds to work at "your pace," you do the players a dis-service. The switch alone could be 5 seconds per non-shooting foul wasted, which might be 2 minutes of playing time in a game. I find that to be relevant.

I'm not rushing the game because you think you might get another minute of playing time in - in the worst case the ball's getting put in play when A has 6 and B has 4. In the best case you have a disorganized mess. (Well actually in the VERY worst case there's someone who innocently wanders into the gym that I might need to impress but won't be because you think you're not getting your full playing time. But that's not your problem, it's mine. And it aint gonna happen.)

If the refs can't or won't control the pace of the game they do not belong on the floor.

Dan, I think that there is a way to balance so that you pick up the pace during dead balls but maintain control over the game. You present this as an either-or situation, I don't believe it is such. I have had a number of high quality refs that clearly pick up their pace to keep things moving when there is a running clock, and I really appreciate the fact that they do so. And there is nothing worse than watching refs who do not seem to be aware that taking their time with a running clock is not making the game better.

By the way, coaches must adapt as well - you need to have subs at the table before the dead ball or as soon as your player gets her fourth foul and before it is reported if you want to get them in and the refs are keeping a quick pace. You have a little more time when the clock is stopped and refs maintain a slightly slower pace.

In practice, refs usually do cut corners (including me) during running clock games.

However, the refs do have a well defined job. There is a clearly defined playing time. If more playing time is the goal, the game should be made longer...not have the refs cut corners.

I work at my pace...which is not slack. If a coach is bugging me near the end of a period in a running clock game about speeding up, I'll take a moment to go over to him to make sure I hear his request clearly. ;)

I once had such a game where there was a foul with 10 or so seconds left in the 1st half. My partner was quickly reporting the foul while the was screaming to get the ball in play. No way I'm putting the ball in play before I know what his call was and if we have the bonus or not. Time ran out before we got it in play. The coach was not pleased. Too bad...that's the way running clock works.

Again, I am not asking that you cut corners to the point that you are making serious errors. And most running clock games have a stoppage rule for the last minute or two of each half to keep time from expiring on a dead ball. The only time that I have seen a continuous running clock throughout the entire game are jamborees, where you have no score kept and three-four courts running on the same clock simultaneously. And those games keep no book and move pretty quick anyway.

Oh yes you are. Remember this?

Quote:

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.

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.

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.

I'm not sure I know what this means

Quote:

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.

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?

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

To run or not to run, that is the question
 

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

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.

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.

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.

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.