161-2

[johnny d]

I don't see a problem with this, especially if the winning coach was playing his bench players. Why should those players who rarely ever see the court be told not to try to score or play defense in a game where they are getting a lot of playing time. The losing coach should stop whining like a baby and coach his team to play better. Now if the winning coach has his starters in and is full court pressing for the entire game, someone might want to have a talk with him.

[HokiePaul]

Sounds like a good argument not to have a shot clock in HS. Let the team pass the ball around for 3 minutes if they want.

Assuming the winning coach emptied his bench, didn't full court press in the second half, and had most of the half scoring come from backups, I don't think there's a problem.

[Nevadaref]

A HS game in CA has 32 minutes of playing time. There is a 30 second shot clock and no 10 second count in the backcourt for girls games.
There is also a running clock mercy rule if the lead is 40+ points in the 4th quarter.

To score 161 a team would need to score an average of 5 points each minute.
Does anyone think they weren't playing full-court defense?

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

A HS game in CA has 32 minutes of playing time. There is a 30 second shot clock and no 10 second count in the backcourt for girls games.
There is also a running clock mercy rule if the lead is 40+ points in the 4th quarter.

To score 161 a team would need to score an average of 5 points each minute.
Does anyone think they weren't playing full-court defense?

My guess would be that they averaged closer to 6 or 7 pts per minute in the first half with starters (and full court press), and 3 or 4 points per minute in the second half with backups and no backcourt press. If they were pressing into the second half then I would have to agree with the losing coach that sportsmanship was not demonstrated.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Does anyone think they weren't playing full-court defense?

I had a team this year up 30 and pressing, legally. I was not happy, but there's nothing you can do.

Conversely, I had another game in which a team was up 30, and they threw the ball around for about two minutes. When the coach saw enough, and he wanted to get subs in, instead of calling time out, he just had the ball dumped out of bounds. That was a better day.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I had a team this year up 30 and pressing, legally. I was not happy, but there's nothing you can do.

Conversely, I had another game in which a team was up 30, and they threw the ball around for about two minutes. When the coach saw enough, and he wanted to get subs in, instead of calling time out, he just had the ball dumped out of bounds. That was a better day.

With a 40 point mercy rule, I think it's a commonly accepted sportsmanship practice to play starters, press, whatever until the 40 point mark is reached. At that point, the press should be immediately pulled, and subs should start coming in. Even though the game is in hand, I actually think it's more merciful to keep pushing to 40, rather than dragging it out.

It's like an old dog that's suffering, sometimes it's better to just put them out of their misery...

[pfan1981]

Had a boys game last year that was not close and the schools did not like each other. Running clock in the fourth.....winning team was trying to get to a hundred with starters mostly in. Insert the officiating crew, got together at the first timeout and agreed to take our time. I know that may not be popular with some of you and that's OK. They finished with 94 points and had the ball on offense for each possession for at most ten seconds, obviously trying to embarrass the other team. On free throws they immediately shot the ball the second they received it. I just wanted to paint a picture of how obvious and unsportsmanlike it was.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Conversely, I had another game in which a team was up 30, and they threw the ball around for about two minutes. When the coach saw enough, and he wanted to get subs in, instead of calling time out, he just had the ball dumped out of bounds. That was a better day.

I woulda been furious to see this charity thrown my way. Like other people said this is way more embarassing. I've called timeout up by alot late and told the officials it's a substitution timeout only. I don't even talk to my players.

Originally Posted by bainsey

I was not happy, but there's nothing you can do.

Yes there is, call fouls.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Yes there is, call fouls.

You apparently missed the part where I said the team was pressing LEGALLY. We indeed were looking, but I'm not going to create phantom fouls to make a point.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

A HS game in CA has 32 minutes of playing time. There is a 30 second shot clock and no 10 second count in the backcourt for girls games.
There is also a running clock mercy rule if the lead is 40+ points in the 4th quarter.

To score 161 a team would need to score an average of 5 points each minute.
Does anyone think they weren't playing full-court defense?

I was going to make this point. How do you score 5 points per minute if you're "waiting until late in the shot clock to shoot"????

[deecee]

Sometimes there is only so much you can do and one team is just so much worse. Sucks for everyone involved but that's life. Maybe these teams shouldn't play each other.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I don't see a problem with this, especially if the winning coach was playing his bench players. Why should those players who rarely ever see the court be told not to try to score or play defense in a game where they are getting a lot of playing time. The losing coach should stop whining like a baby and coach his team to play better. Now if the winning coach has his starters in and is full court pressing for the entire game, someone might want to have a talk with him.

The score was 161-2. let me REPEAT that 161-2. there is no reason EVER to win a game by 159 points…they should have stopped at 100..:roll eyes:

when one team is that bad it is not competition. none of the players on the winning team are going to get better at basketball or learn anything about Xs and 0s from that mess. including bench players. so take the time to teach a life lesson--lesson being that it isn't necessary to utterly destroy someone else just because you can…

i understand your point--but it was 161-2...

[Mark Padgett]

Perhaps the winning coach had his players continue to score to avoid the possibility of OT!

Good for him.

[Pantherdreams]

Not saying this is the case.

If the coach played his bench kids (when it was clear to see the game was out of reach - which was probably well before half time), if they stopped pressing, and theycan still win by 100 or 150 or whatever. I don't think the coach of the winning team can be faulted.

I don't see a team playing keep away (with or without a shot clock) or not letting your bench kids run the floor to score, take layups or defend properly fair or equitable either. THey are bad so, so you have to be bad isn't right. You can work on your quarter court zone or whatever. If you bench kids get a chance to play and score its on the other coach to have 5 kids better then your worst 5.

At the point where everyone possible is in the game, you've backed your defense up to quarter court and given them the opportunity to execute 5 on 5: thats it they've met their obligation to sportsmanship. Holding the ball or letting the other team shoot should be more embarassing to kids on the floor then being beaten or scored on. . . . I would think.

In the case in the OP it sounds like the game was well on its way to out of hand well before half time so the starters IMO should have been out way before then. No mention of whether pressing happened to what extent but to get that many possessions even against a bad team you can assume they pressed most of the game. So I'm not defending the coach just talking about the situation as a generality.