2019 NFHS Questionnaire

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SD Referee

Disagree 100%. We adopted the shot clock a few years back and you hardly notice it at all. Keeps the pace of the game up. You also don't get teams holding the ball for 2 minutes of game time any more.

...

I can't remember the last time a team held the ball for even an entire minute in any of my HS games. I can list numerous times every season where my college games get interrupted to fix shot-clock issues.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I can't remember the last time a team held the ball for even an entire minute in any of my HS games. I can list numerous times every season where my college games get interrupted to fix shot-clock issues.

I can't even begin to explain to you how often we would see it in our area.

You get a big game. It's a nut cruncher as you expected. Then with 2 or 3 minutes to go in the game, the team that is winning starts to spread the floor and run the clock down to preserve the win. 2 to 3 minutes!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is now gone. You actually have to make plays to keep your lead and win.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SD Referee

Disagree 100%. We adopted the shot clock a few years back and you hardly notice it at all. Keeps the pace of the game up. You also don't get teams holding the ball for 2 minutes of game time any more.

I don't see that without the shot clock more than 1-2 times a year....it is a solution looking for a problem.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't see that without the shot clock more than 1-2 times a year....it is a solution looking for a problem.

That may be true in your area, but not in mine. Saying it's a solution looking for a problem does not make it true for the whole high school basketball playing population.

In our area, it was common to see a team pass/hold a ball for 1-2 minutes at the end of a quarter or game to get the last shot.

I understand that adding the shot clock to areas where 2 man crews are the norm may make it harder, but if you work 3 man, the shot clock doesn't have much effect on the officials. If you can't handle adding the shot clock, well.......

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SD Referee

Disagree 100%. We adopted the shot clock a few years back and you hardly notice it at all. Keeps the pace of the game up. You also don't get teams holding the ball for 2 minutes of game time any more.

I cannot remember the last time I have seen a team hold the ball for 2 minutes in my career. I have certainly had it happen, but we are talking over 10 years ago. And the only time I see a team hold the ball for more than 30 or 40 seconds, is so they get the last shot in the quarter. That is actually very common in college games too more than high school.

I love how the narrative is to suggest this is something going on all the time when it simply is not the case.

Peace

[SC Official]

I don't understand why the pro-shot clock crowd talks about how awful stalling is but never says anything about the defenses sitting back and not making any attempt to get a count or force action.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I cannot remember the last time I have seen a team hold the ball for 2 minutes in my career. I have certainly had it happen, but we are talking over 10 years ago. And the only time I see a team hold the ball for more than 30 or 40 seconds, is so they get the last shot in the quarter. That is actually very common in college games too more than high school.

I love how the narrative is to suggest this is something going on all the time when it simply is not the case.

Peace

It's wasn't all the time, but was VERY COMMON in my area. I don't know if it's lack of skillful players or coaching philosophy in this area, but teams were more than happy to hold onto the ball for 1-2 minutes to get the last shot.

Some of you(not necessarily you personally) veteran, decorated officials are acting like the addition of a shot clock substantially changes your job. I'm surprised at the reaction. Is it because you work primarily 2 man crews?

[Terrapins Fan]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

I am strongly against a shot clock. I haven’t been on a game in a couple years where it was necessary. Not to mention that’s one more major thing for us to worry about, one more major thing that will get screwed up at the table. This is a solution looking for a problem.

We have had a shot clock in Maryland for 2 years now. It works well. I would say I have had about 3 shot clock violations and I work about 50 games a year here it is used. It makes the game easier in the last 2 or 3 minutes, where I have seen teams with a lead, in the past, stall from the 3 minute mark.

[griblets]

Originally Posted by Terrapins Fan

I would say I have had about 3 shot clock violations and I work about 50 games a year here it is used.

This is why so many of us think the shot clock is not necessary. It's a solution to a non-existent problem.

[ilyazhito]

To me, this is just the sign of Maryland teams getting used to playing with a shot clock. In DC, I have also had shot clock violations in my games, although most have come without them. I have also (informally) timed games across the bridge in VA with a shot clock, and I have noticed between 2 and 5 shot clock violations per game on average. There tend to be more shot cook violations in girls games, and in the playoffs, in my experience.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Terrapins Fan

I would say I have had about 3 shot clock violations and I work about 50 games a year here it is used.

Originally Posted by griblets

This is why so many of us think the shot clock is not necessary. It's a solution to a non-existent problem.

While I'm not generally in favor of a shot clock in HS, your conclusion from Terrapins Fan's experience is not valid. The mere presence of the shot clock would have changed the behavior. For your conclusion to be valid, the shot clock would have to have been a secret to the players and coaches, not knowing it was there at all.

[BlueDevilRef]

Frankly I’m neutral on seatbelt. But I do think it’s reasoning is sound: act like a child enough to get a tech, be treated like a child and have to sit down. But yes, it is a little silly for lots of reasons previously stated.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Frankly I’m neutral on seatbelt. But I do think it’s reasoning is sound: act like a child enough to get a tech, be treated like a child and have to sit down. But yes, it is a little silly for lots of reasons previously stated.

But coaches aren't children. I don't tolerate misbehavior and I expect sportsmanship rules to be followed, but at the same time treating coaches like kids doesn't help the situation at all. Emotion is a part of the game and sometimes it crosses the line, but that doesn't mean we should have to monitor the coach the rest of the game.

[Paintguru]

Originally Posted by SC Official

But coaches aren't children. I don't tolerate misbehavior and I expect sportsmanship rules to be followed, but at the same time treating coaches like kids doesn't help the situation at all. Emotion is a part of the game and sometimes it crosses the line, but that doesn't mean we should have to monitor the coach the rest of the game.

True, but I feel like the addition of the book warning gives officials enough tools to deal with coaches in a non-confrontational manner. Once a T is necessary, I have no issue with the added "penalty" of seat-belting (granted, I wouldn't cry if it was eliminated either).

As for the rest of this survey, I voted against the shot clock and against all fashion police rules. Granted I only do F/JV for now, so perhaps some of these issues present themselves differently at the V level. However, the only fashion police question we as officials should need to answer is "does the player's equipment present a safety issue?".