Mercy Rule

[Grail]

It appears that the IHSA will be eliminating the Mercy rule for the upcoming season. The advisory committee is recommending that the rule only be in place for in-season tournaments played prior to Feb. 1.

One of the reasons they gave for dumping the rule is the "uneven" officiating during the running-clock period. The comments stated that officials would pass on some calls to get the game finished.

While I agree with dumping the rule, that piece of logic fails me. Once the clock is running, the game will end whether or not we blow the whistle. I'm thinking that the reality is that officials will withhold the whistle during a blow out that doesn't have a running clock.

Anyway, just wanted to post the information.

[JRutledge]

I am sure it happened somewhere, but I do not buy that was a major problem. What officials figured out was that when we called fouls that was a time to take more time off the clock. It became an art form to know how to milk the clock. That sounds more like a bunch of coaches that want to think that was happening rather than that really happening.

The biggest opposition to this rule I heard was coaches could not play the kids that did not play as much. This would especially take place at the lower levels where coaches wanted to develop their programs.

Peace

[tjones1]

Nice to know what I posted a few weeks ago was right! Thanks Grail!

[TigerBball]

From a coaching perspective, I hate mercy rules. And I have been on both sides of the rule many times.

Either way, I want my players to get the benefit of that game experience. Managing the clock, real competition, real referees, fans, etc. The running clock takes away a few minutes of play which does not seem like a lot, but to a player that normally does not play much, it is huge.

As a side note, since I coach 7th grade, I play all my players equally until the fourth quarter anyways, but if the game is pretty much decided, I like to get other guys into the mix in the 4th just to give them that experience.

[ChrisSportsFan]

I would think when the score is 30+ difference is when refs might pass on calls to keep that clock moving.

I hear what the coaches say about getting the end of their bench some playing time but if your starters were getting crushed, how much confidence will your subs get from being pushed in the mud and their lunch money taken? Mop-up might be fun when you're winning but when you're losing, why bail the starters out of the game? Make em stay out there and suck it up!

[johnny1784]

I like the mercy rule and would hope the NFHS would change the use of quarters to 16 minute halves.

[tjones1]

I don't quite understand this reasoning. The clock is going to run even if the official makes the call (unless it's one of the five that stops the clock). Either way, it certainly had a good side and a bad side to it. Doesn't make me much different whether it's there or not.

[JRutledge]

Does anyone have any specific information as to if this is official?

What specific Advisory Committee made this a recommendation? Is that the Official's Advisory Committee? The reason I ask is because there are some committees that can make recommendations and those recommendations are rejected. I was also under the impression that this rule was only experimental in the first place. Not sure who makes the final decisions when it all boils down to it.

Peace

[jritchie]

i think the mercy rule would ACTUALLY HELP THE OFFICIATING..
If the clock is not going to stop, why would the officials not call anything.... I would think that they may over call because if teams are in the bonus or double bonus, most of the time would be spent on the free throw line with the clock running and the kids standing still not killing each other!!! Sounds a lot better to me than, not calling anything and letting the kids run around knocking each other all over the place!!! I can see where the Coaches that are on the winning side wouldn't want it because they want to get their SCRUBS IN...all i can say to that is get more JV games if they want them to play more....because if the score is that lop sided then the losing coach probably has his worst players in too and that won't help either team one bit....So I would definitely stand behind the mercy rule 100%.....

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by JRutledge
Does anyone have any specific information as to if this is official?

What specific Advisory Committee made this a recommendation? Is that the Official's Advisory Committee? The reason I ask is because there are some committees that can make recommendations and those recommendations are rejected. I was also under the impression that this rule was only experimental in the first place. Not sure who makes the final decisions when it all boils down to it.

Peace

I checked the IHSA website, and under the B/G Basketball Advisory Committee meeting minutes from 4/28/05, it mentions:

ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. The committee recommends that the Mercy Rule used during the 2004-05 season be used only in regular season tournaments, that choose to use the Mercy Rule, prior to February 1, 2006.

Rationale: The committee believes that while the concept of the Mercy Rule has some merit, its use is best suited to regular-season tournaments. Two years ago when used during regular season tournaments as an experiment, feedback on the Mercy Rule was favorable. Its use this past season, however, was not received favorably. Concerns of demeaning athletes and inconsistent officiating during its use in the regular season were voiced by virtually the entire committee.

ITEMS OF GENERAL DISCUSSION:

1. In discussing the Mercy Rule, the committee expressed a concern concerning both coaches and officials. From a coaching perspective, the committee is concerned about situations where schools continue to employ strategies, such as pressing or fast-breaking, even after games have reached the point of instituting the Mercy Rule. From an officialÂ’s perspective, the committee is concerned that there may have been instances when officials passed on calls when the Mercy Rule was employed in order to get the games completed too quickly.
2. The committee reviewed changes to basketball playing rules for 2005-06. Sporting behavior, free throw situations, and intentional fouls will be Points of Emphasis in addition to the rules changes, and schools and coaches should be prepared for significant discussion on these topics in 2005-06.

So, all I can find so far is that's it's only a recommendation and not final.

[tjones1]

Good stuff M&M.

[JRutledge]

I just think one of their claims was bogus. You could waste a full minute if you called a foul. Between the foul, reporting the foul, substitutions and FTs, a lot of time would go off the clock. I know I would focus more on calling fouls because the clock would run and run. I would not even have to do anything special. Players in the game would not be familiar with where to go or stand or who is taking out the ball. The clock would run off mainly because of the uncertainty of the players and coaches at this point of the game. It is the same thing in football when we get to the mercy rule in that game.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

I ABSOLUTELY agree the issue of officials not calling fouls during the running clock is completely bogus. In fact, everyone I've talked to says just the opposite - they might call a foul just to stop the action while the clock is still running. Now, if the committee had said that was the problem (too many fouls called), I could live with that explanation, but NOT the problem of not calling fouls. Maybe it does cut into some scrubs playing time, but if coaches are on the ball, they can take care of that easily. Besides, if coaches are too busy criticizing the officials instead of taking care of the game and their players, I can see where they might miss out on those opportunities...

[26 Year Gap]

Originally posted by M&M Guy
I ABSOLUTELY agree the issue of officials not calling fouls during the running clock is completely bogus. In fact, everyone I've talked to says just the opposite - they might call a foul just to stop the action while the clock is still running. Now, if the committee had said that was the problem (too many fouls called), I could live with that explanation, but NOT the problem of not calling fouls. Maybe it does cut into some scrubs playing time, but if coaches are on the ball, they can take care of that easily. Besides, if coaches are too busy criticizing the officials instead of taking care of the game and their players, I can see where they might miss out on those opportunities...

If they want to get the bench players in, could they not simply call timeout?

[johnny1784]

Originally posted by jritchie
i think the mercy rule would ACTUALLY HELP THE OFFICIATING..
If the clock is not going to stop, why would the officials not call anything.... I would think that they may over call because if teams are in the bonus or double bonus, most of the time would be spent on the free throw line with the clock running and the kids standing still not killing each other!!! Sounds a lot better to me than, not calling anything and letting the kids run around knocking each other all over the place!!! I can see where the Coaches that are on the winning side wouldn't want it because they want to get their SCRUBS IN...all i can say to that is get more JV games if they want them to play more....because if the score is that lop sided then the losing coach probably has his worst players in too and that won't help either team one bit....So I would definitely stand behind the mercy rule 100%.....

I agree with you 100%. They need a running clock for any JV game, mercy or no mercy!!