Anyone in Georgia hear about this??

[Rufus]

I'm in Georgia and hadn't heard of that one. It's amazing what folks come up with, though, when they think they have to.

The only way I can see this as being an issue is if the game in question preceded two other scheduled games (and they were held on a night when there is school the following day). The rule we have is that if there is a doubleheader on such a night the first game has to start no later than 6pm. We've been instructed to shave period time for JV contests to comply with this rule (running clock's not an option - ever).

Since this was apparently a varsity contest, however, I cannot imagine what they were thinking (other than get the flippin' game over).

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Rufus

I'm in Georgia and hadn't heard of that one. It's amazing what folks come up with, though, when they think they have to.

The only way I can see this as being an issue is if the game in question preceded two other scheduled games (and they were held on a night when there is school the following day). The rule we have is that if there is a doubleheader on such a night the first game has to start no later than 6pm. We've been instructed to shave period time for JV contests to comply with this rule (running clock's not an option - ever).

Since this was apparently a varsity contest, however, I cannot imagine what they were thinking (other than get the flippin' game over).

In some states (OK comes to mind), varsity boys games almost always follow varsity girls games. That way the conferences can do parallel scheduling. So maybe that was the situation here? That said, unless there are conference or state rules that govern this situation, I'm not adjusting anything no matter how long the game goes on. We'll play until the game manager hands me a phone with my commissioner on the other end!

I had a 2OT JV boys game recently where the V coach (who's game followed mine) tried to convince me that there was a JV rule that stated the OT period would be shaved off by a minute each OT. I didn't buy it. He just wanted to get his guys going...

[BoomerSooner]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

In some states (OK comes to mind), varsity boys games almost always follow varsity girls games.

I don't know if this was done across all of Oklahoma, but this was actually changed up at my school and the other local schools when I was in high school. We always played after the girls until my junior year, at which point we alternated the order of the games. The issue was that the girls games were so poorly attended that there was fear that someone might perceive the girls followed by boys scheduling to be evidence of an inequity between genders and thus a Title IX issue. I think part of the issue was that the gate was actually divided between the boys and girls programs depending on when the tickets were bought.

Returning to the topic at hand, shortening the quarters is allowed under 5.5.3:

"A quarter(s) may be shortened in an emergency or at any time by mutual agreement of the opposing coaches and referee. Playing time and number of quarters for non-varsity game quarters may be reduced by mutual agreement of opposing coaches".

Given that a coach complained, it doesn't sound like everybody agreed in this situation. This rule also doesn't support a "sudden death period", although I suppose both coaches could have agreed that once one team scored they would then agree to shorten the period at that time to a tenth of a second (the rule specifies the quarter may be shortened "at any time") and then just allow the time to expire. Beyond the OP, I've never seen anything like this and I can't imagine I ever will, but there is at least a theoretical way to do this within the rules withstanding the objection made by those that would would point out that this rule specifies a quarter may be shortened and thus this does not apply to an extra period (which I think is an argument that could be successfully taken up from either side).

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BoomerSooner

I don't know if this was done across all of Oklahoma, but this was actually changed up at my school and the other local schools when I was in high school. We always played after the girls until my junior year, at which point we alternated the order of the games. The issue was that the girls games were so poorly attended that there was fear that someone might perceive the girls followed by boys scheduling to be evidence of an inequity between genders and thus a Title IX issue. I think part of the issue was that the gate was actually divided between the boys and girls programs depending on when the tickets were bought.

Interesting. I called 4A/5A/6A in the OKC metro from 2007-09. Never once saw a boys game go first, though I did hear people talk about the perception of sexism that never letting the girls play last created. Who knows, maybe after I left the movement gained some traction, but it sure didn't while I was there.

[BoomerSooner]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Interesting. I called 4A/5A/6A in the OKC metro from 2007-09. Never once saw a boys game go first, though I did hear people talk about the perception of sexism that never letting the girls play last created. Who knows, maybe after I left the movement gained some traction, but it sure didn't while I was there.

I graduated high school in 2000 in Lawton, so a little before the time frame you mention and a different area of the state. Being in high school at the time, I wasn't in a position to know all of the politics behind it, but I think they eventually agreed to divide up the gate evenly between boys and girls programs and the issue went away.