timeout replacement?? ncaa

[jritchie]

is 20 seconds enough time to get a disqualified player a sub?? i know they don't want them taking up a lot of time and huddling and things like that, but it takes a second or two to get your bearings after maybe a heated call that fouled out your best player....i think the 30 seconds was okay, they didnt' need to shorten it..i know it speeds up the game and if they need more time, they could always call a timeout if they have any left!!!

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by jritchie
is 20 seconds enough time to get a disqualified player a sub?? i know they don't want them taking up a lot of time and huddling and things like that, but it takes a second or two to get your bearings after maybe a heated call that fouled out your best player....i think the 30 seconds was okay, they didnt' need to shorten it..i know it speeds up the game and if they need more time, they could always call a timeout if they have any left!!!

Are you kidding?

10 seconds should be enough time.

Every decent coach has plan for how to replace players as they foul out. This has become nothing but an opportunity for a free 30 sec TO.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Are you kidding?

10 seconds should be enough time.

Every decent coach has plan for how to replace players as they foul out. This has become nothing but an opportunity for a free 30 sec TO.

I agree. IL experimented with a rule that the DQd player had to be replaced "immediately". I thought it worked well (once all the coaches got over the paranoia that some official would be too strict on "immediately" and once officials heard not to be so strict).

My understanding is that IL pushed for the experiment to become the NFHS rule, but it was voted down by the committee.