"An actionless contest"...?

[zeedonk]

Morning all-

Saturday boys V game. I had the JV and had some time before my next stop, so I hung out to check out the big boys game when the following occurred:

2 man crew. Game played as per usual in 1st quarter. Home team gets up a couple of points in 2nd Q then slows down the offense a few times. They get a resounding 5 point lead and literally stopped playing- brought the ball over midcourt and PG stopped and held the ball for the remaining 4:45 of the half.

Groans in the stands. V team coach not happy and glaring at H bench. H coach sits down the end of his bench not looking at anyone except his PG. Players were chatting amicably while the clock ticked down. Players seems either amused or just shrugged shoulders.

Now, I know that there USED to be a rule (maybe in NCAA) that says the team behind has to force the action. The officials in this game made sure nobody sat down on the floor, or otherwise did anything except stand there.

I believe that I read in the rule or case book that the officials shall "not allow the game to become an actionless contest" or words to that effect. I can't seem to find that language now that I actually look for it.

I had to leave at halftime- 2 questions:

1- were the officials correct in allowing the stall for the last 4:45? (I lean towards yes, but reserve the right to change my mind for question 2 below)

2- what if they continued in the 3rd & 4th quarter? Since I cannot find the "actionless contest" language, I can't cite the rule, but my thought at the time was that if I were the official, I would obviously discuss it at halftime and have a plan- mine would have been (to frantically search for the rule to bail me out at halftime) and not allow the stall to continue in 3rd quarter, citing the "actionless contest" language. Since I can't pull the citation out, that may get me in some hot water..

Further getting myself into more hot water, I would have considered allowing H team to stall again in 4th quarter to protect the lead. For some reason, stalling in the 4th quarter, to me, is different than the 2nd and 3rd quarters which results in an "actionless contest".

So, if I were the V official, and I did what I was leaning towards doing, would I ever get another V game?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by zeedonk

So, if I were the V official, and I did what I was leaning towards doing, would I ever get another V game?

It's a legal play.

There used to be a rule that the team behind had to force the action.

If H thinks this play gives them the best chance to win, and V allows it to happen, the officials should just stand there and collect game fee.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

the officials should just stand there and collect game fee.

While I haven't had the situation to this extent, I have had several teams "work the ball around" for extended periods of time without really being challenged and concur - it's a great way to keep the game moving, collect a check, and.....have the fans vent against someone other than us!

[Nevadaref]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. The current rule about an actionless contest (10-1-5) has no applicability to this situation. If you notice, all of the examples listed under that rule are for times when a team prevents the ball from being put into play. In this case the ball is already in play. There is no rule which dictates HOW a team must play other than that they cannot do anything unsporting. BTW, I don't see any reason that the players couldn't sit down on the court if they so wished. I believe that the officials would be incorrect to instruct them not to do that.

If an official in my area attempted to do anything to a team employing the strategy of stalling, then that official would certainly get a stern talking to before being assigned to another varsity contest.

[doubleringer]

If the V coach didn't like it, why didn't he have his players go out and get a 5 count going. This is nothing the officials can or should address. This is coaching.

[LSams]

although unorthodox, this is good strategy.

In HS ball, especially, a coach has to use the personnel that are enrolled at the school, and go out for sport. If the talent is not the best, you sometimes have to get creative with strategy.

In college ball, if your talent is not "good enough," as a coach, that's your fault because you recruit your players. I think this contrast is one of the primary reasons that we have a shot-clock in college ball and not in HS ball (except for a few exceptions).

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by doubleringer

If the V coach didn't like it, why didn't he have his players go out and get a 5 count going. This is nothing the officials can or should address. This is coaching.

AMEN!

When I was coaching, at various times we would "shorten the game" by running time off the clock. Not a total stall but literally shortening the game. Say the time was 5:43 on the clock. We'd run our offense without a shot until the clock got under 5:00. From a coaching standpoint it can be very dangerous to totally stall as this takes away the momentum that you've built.

This is going to date me, but I seem to remember a game in the ACC way back in the 60's or 70's where the final score was something like 7-5. I am sure this promoted the introduction of the shot clock. We have a shot clock here in the big schools and it seems to work ok for HS kids.

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by doubleringer

If the V coach didn't like it, why didn't he have his players go out and get a 5 count going. This is nothing the officials can or should address. This is coaching.

Cosign. If the coach didn't think of this, that AD should seriously consider finding someone else.

[IREFU2]

Had this in a Girls AAA District Championship game this past friday night. It was tie score and the home team held the ball for 3:00 minutes and then called time out. We just made sure we stayed awake during this time!!!