http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mor...oring_game_ap/

This was a regional playoff game!! Another advertisement for a shot clock in high school ball.

The link was posted in "NY Times Article" thread below.

What I find interesting is that the team that was behind was the one which held the ball. Again, I don't have a rulebook with me, but isn't there some rule about the team that's behind has to make an attempt to play? Maybe its one of those situations where you had to be there - personally, I'm glad I wasn't.

Wrong board - try the Seally PosturePedic discussion group.

Can you imaginge officiating that game?

Yup, easiest 80 bucks you'd ever see.

Chuck

That rule was taken out at least 20 years ago,Coach.

No...not as applied to a team burning the clock, either behind or ahead.

Goes to show that us ol' guys still got faster reflexes than you young snapper-whippers!

I think it was a bit less than 20 -- I know the rule was in effect in '82 . . . while a good rule, it had limits, anyway. If the offensive player dribbled past the hash marks, and the defender didn't come out, the offensive player could stand there as long as he wanted.

Why would'nt the other team just pressure them with defense and force turnovers of 10 second backcourt and 5 second closely guarded calls....

How about the ole travesty of the game stance to get things moving as well....

Yeah...well...I guess that's what I get for borrowing one of MTD Sr's rule books.

Often, that is what the stalling team wants: to pull the defense out and attack the spread out defense instead of the packed in defense. Here, the losing team was stalling, so why would the winning team spread out its D to make itself more vulnerable?

Don't even think of going to the travesty of the game: the stall has long been part (albeit an ugly part) of basketball. And is not being done to mock the game, but as a conscious strategy to give the team the best chance to win the game -- and here it almost worked as a team that obviously thought it had no chance of winning a straight-up game pushed the game to OT.

But I agree that it is an argument for implementing the shot clock . . .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by hawkk
[B]I think it was a bit less than 20 -- I know the rule was in effect in '82 . . .

I don't know when the rule was taken out, but 1982 is 21 years ago.