Since the rule committee is meeting soon I thought I would bring this up.

What do you all think of a HS shot clock? I know that some states use it all ready. Do think that we would ever get one at the High School level?

For those of you who already use a shot clock for HS ball do you think it had made the game better? It what ways? Do you use NCAA guidelines or your own?

Just curious and wanted to spark some discussion.

In Washington State, we use a 30-second shot clock for HS girls. It definitely makes the game a little quicker and more enjoyable to ref.

The boys don't use the shot clock at all. I think something like a 40-second shot clock in boys would be great from a spectators point of view. Just my opinion... doesn't make that big of a difference to me.

Z

In Nassau County (NY) we have been using a shot-clock (35 second) in boy's high school games. Overall, I don't think that it has made much of a difference in the game. It seems that the shot clock rarely if ever goes off.

I don't personally like the rule, but what will hold it back, regardless of my reasons, is the monetary side of it. There are alot of rural schools out there that can barely afford to keep playing basketball let alone buy additional equipment to maintain a shot clock.

My reasoning behind it is that there are frequently shot clock problems in the NBA and NCAA where it has been used for many years. Just imagine the problems that could arise at the HS level where frequently the clock operators have difficulties that so frequently make our board. We would have to start a whole a whole new board for shot clock questions.

Either that, or I could drop out of school and travel around the country doing HS shot clocks. With the number of high schools, I'd probably make more money than even the 60 game D-I refs. :p

I have had several clock operators I would not want running a shot clock! They could not even stop the clock when the whistle blows much less resetting the shot clock at the right times.

I have found that shot clock systems that integrate with the scoreboard are about $2000. That is more probably more then most schools can pay.

We have our share of very small and budget-limited schools in our area. However, they all managed to acquire shot clocks when our state decided to use them.

Shot clock difficulties are rare. I can't remember the last time that a shot clock error by the table causes any additional grief in one of my games. Besides, having a shot clock to manage is a great way to force officials to become clock aware.

Z

It couldn't be any worse than shot clock operators at teh JUCO level!! And I perfer that to a high school game with no shot clock. I think you will see it withing the next 5 years. 35 sec clock probably.

Given the choice between a shot clock or 3-whistle at the HS level, I'll take the 3-whistle.

How about both? :)

Not that I have a vast portfolio of experience to draw from, but I just don't see the HS shot clock making much of a difference the games I work. Sure, it has a cool factor associated with it that's largely driven by its presence in the NCAA and NBA. But a cool factor isn't the same as an improvement in the game.

Sure, there are expenses and hassles associated with it that dull its alure. But mostly I think HS ball is where players gain the experience necessary to make good decisions. I feel that the learning process is best achieved, for the largest number of kids, without the added pressure of having the shot clock. At higher levels, the emphasis is on executing on the skills athletes have already gained. There a shot clock makes sense.

Nor do I buy the arguments about the shot clock improving the HS game, making it more exciting and drawing larger crowds, thus making HS basketball programs more profitable, yadda yadda yadda. Sure, there is some boring HS ball. But, by and large, the style of play that has trickled down from the NCAA and NBA is naturally fast-paced enough already. As has been pointed out by them than have them, HS shot clocks aren't sounding very often.

HS gyms, at least in my area, are largely packed with family members, fellow students and alumni. These folks come primarily because they have a vested interest in the players, secondarily for the game. Yes, some programs have trouble drawing a crowd, even from the ranks of those interested in its players. I don't believe just adding a shot clock will solve these program's problem.

3-whistle crews, on the other hand, serve the game as it is. It produces better called games, more eyes off-ball and more officials aware of brewing situations. It tends to clean up rough play and better police sloppy play. In my limited experience, it tends to produce better played games and more interesting basketball. It adds additional value to the role we as officials play in meeting the desirable goals of HS athletics.

I'll take 3-whistle and leave the shot clock. JMHO :)

[Edited by Back In The Saddle on Apr 18th, 2005 at 05:14 PM]

You have some good points. I think that having a three whistle crew would definitely improve the way the game is called as long as the officials know what they are doing.

Why do you think they wouldn't?

Let me give you a perfect example. The first year IL went to using 3-whistle in the post season, I was assigned with two other officials, both from a little outside my area. I happened to know one of them from doing JUCO ball, but the other I did not know. It turned out the official I didn't know had been working for years, but finally decided to apply for the post season and got his first ever assignment. It was also the first game he ever did 3-whistle. His "clinic" was in the car with the guy I knew on the way to the game. The game went along ok, with no big problems, but we had to continually adjust for his positioning, point to where he needed to go, etc. In any type of intense game this would've been a disaster.

That said, I agree if I had a choice between a shot clock and 3-whistle, I would pick 3-whistle every time. But there will be the problems with finding that many more experienced officials to cover all the available games. There will be the ones that have worked 2-whistle for years, but will be a "newbie" when it comes to 3. There will be that adjustment period for the experience level of the "pool of officials" to catch up.

There will be an adjustment period for any big change, but the sooner everyone learns it the better. In most major areas it is the standard. They have been using 3 person for several years now at the high school level in my area. They guys who know it are varsity officials. The guys who don't are JV officials, and you have to build a system to bring people up through. From learning at the freshman/jv HS level, to becoming more porficient at 3 person and moving to the Varsity level, and then possibly into college and pro level. Everyone has to start on the bottom at some point. Granted, this official had no business getting a tournament assignment if he couldn't work 3 person. The system in your area needs to be fixed to where this would not happen.

The IHSA is at least trying. They still have the requirement that in order to work post season you must attend a camp or clinic once every 3 years. I think this official was one that made it through the cracks, so to speak, because this was the 1st year of 3-whistle in the post season. But there are still a large number of officials that have little 3-whistle experience during the season because there are still many smaller schools that will only pay for 2 officials. In the larger, metro areas 3-whistle is common, if not the norm. However, there are a large number of schools outside these metro areas. The AD comments are almost all having to do with money, or lack of it, to pay for 3 officials for the varsity game. So maybe the only way the 3-whistle experience level will go up is to require schools to hire officials that way. But I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Also be aware that the NFHS has taken the voting privileges away from the states that are using shot clocks. Shot clocks are not recommended by the NFHS.
Personally I think a shot clock does enhance a high school game, boys or girls.
I know the flow in the college game is certainly better for it.
The 3 person system does have growing pains, i.e. Coaches not able to "to get away with" stuff they can in 2 person, learning curve, etc. but the difference it makes in the game is ENORMOUS. We all know this but the more we reiterate it the more we are conditioned to have this response when we talk to different entities in our respective basketball environments.
AAR

I'm not sure this is true. It may be a myth. I talked to a bigwig in the MA Interscholastic Athletic Association (sets state rules if different from FED). She said that it is true that MA has been barred from chairing the rules committee, but that we still have voting rights.

On top of that, she said that our punishment is not for using a shot clock; but for using halves, instead of quarters.

That's just what I was told.

Yeah, I think you're right that it is a myth Chuck. I talked to the director of the Washington Officials Association and he said that the shot clock is NOT the reason that Washington State doesn't have voting privileges. In fact, someone on our state's WOA committee suggested a vote to remove the shot clock from girl's basketball. In the end, there was more support on the committee for adding a shot clock in boys basketball amid rumors that the NFHS is going to approve the use of shot clocks by state adoption.

Z

I know all the new gyms and schools, or schools putting in new clocks etc. in my area have them. Some schools even have the LED lights on the backboards. I think everyone is anticipating NFHS bringing the shot clock in.

That would be great if you were correct. I was just going off of what somebody higher up in California told me.
I am all for the shot clock.
AAR