5 Second Violation??

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by chartrusepengui

Ok, who is causing this to be an actionless contest - the O holding the ball or the D not playing any D? Hmmmmmmmmmmm

There was a good discussion of this in another thread recently:
Backcourt Question

Personally, I'd warn both teams. Obviously the offense is doing nothing. But all the defense needs to do is get 1 player in a guarding position within 6 feet of the player with the ball to force a 5 sec closely guarded count.

IMHO, by doing nothing both teams are making a farce of the game. If this is a legal play, then what is the point of having a shot clock, if not to force the offense to do something, and prevent a situation exactly like this? Ditto with the 10 sec backcourt count...might as well get rid of both if leagues don't mind situations like this.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

There was a good discussion of this in another thread recently:
Backcourt Question

Personally, I'd warn both teams. Obviously the offense is doing nothing. But all the defense needs to do is get 1 player in a guarding position within 6 feet of the player with the ball to force a 5 sec closely guarded count.

IMHO, by doing nothing both teams are making a farce of the game. If this is a legal play, then what is the point of having a shot clock, if not to force the offense to do something, and prevent a situation exactly like this? Ditto with the 10 sec backcourt count...might as well get rid of both if leagues don't mind situations like this.

Again, under what authority? You are putting a team at a distinct disadvantage by not allowing them to execute a perfectly legal strategy.

Since we seem to be discussing NFHS rules here, there is not point, because there is no shot clock. If you work in a state that has a shot clock, or you want to discuss NCAA or NBA rules, then this discussion is moot.

Bottom line - the game is not actionless, nor is it a farce, if the offense holds the ball near mid-court and the defense chooses not to force the action by closely guarding.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Bottom line - the game is not actionless, nor is it a farce, if the offense holds the ball near mid-court and the defense chooses not to force the action by closely guarding.

I'll go back to this; if the clock is moving, there's action.

If your state doesn't have a shot clock; this is perfectly legal. If your state does have a shot clock, it's easy to deal with.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

Personally, I'd warn both teams. Obviously the offense is doing nothing. But all the defense needs to do is get 1 player in a guarding position within 6 feet of the player with the ball to force a 5 sec closely guarded count.

I wouldn't warn the teams. But after the first quarter, I might go to the coaches and ask if they'd rather just shorten the quarters. Why let the clock run for 8 minutes, when both teams are happy to play only the last minute of each quarter? Why not just play 2 minute quarters for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters? This is perfectly within the rules and it would eliminate the tedium.

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I wouldn't warn the teams. But after the first quarter, I might go to the coaches and ask if they'd rather just shorten the quarters. Why let the clock run for 8 minutes, when both teams are happy to play only the last minute of each quarter? Why not just play 2 minute quarters for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters? This is perfectly within the rules and it would eliminate the tedium.

This is a good suggestion, which I was not aware we had the power to do. I just searched for and found the rule that you mentioned which allows that. Definitely better than having us twiddle our thumbs for the better part of 32 minutes. But it still doesn't get to the root of the problem. Even if you shorten the length of each quarter to 2 minutes, what is to prevent the teams from continuing to stand there and do nothing? You could have an infinite number of overtime periods, and at what point do you call it a night and declare the game over and go home?

[chartrusepengui]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

This is a good suggestion, which I was not aware we had the power to do. I just searched for and found the rule that you mentioned which allows that. Definitely better than having us twiddle our thumbs for the better part of 32 minutes. But it still doesn't get to the root of the problem. Even if you shorten the length of each quarter to 2 minutes, what is to prevent the teams from continuing to stand there and do nothing? You could have an infinite number of overtime periods, and at what point do you call it a night and declare the game over and go home?

Rest assurred that with 10 seconds to go in the game or 1st OT someone will drive the ball to the basket and attempt to score.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

This is a good suggestion, which I was not aware we had the power to do. I just searched for and found the rule that you mentioned which allows that. Definitely better than having us twiddle our thumbs for the better part of 32 minutes. But it still doesn't get to the root of the problem. Even if you shorten the length of each quarter to 2 minutes, what is to prevent the teams from continuing to stand there and do nothing? You could have an infinite number of overtime periods, and at what point do you call it a night and declare the game over and go home?

Yawn......

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

might as well get rid of both if leagues don't mind situations like this.

I think it's fairly safe to assume that no league WANTS play like this. But it doesn't happen often enough to warrant addressing it with a major rules change.