Basketball game ends, 2-0

[scrounge]

as long as that clock kept running, I'm cool with it

Had a middle school girls game this week that was 2-2 with 2:00 left in the THIRD quarter. There was a late offensive explosion and we ended up with a 10-6 final. The first two baskets were scored early in the 1st, and I had to waive off a FT because the shooter immediately entered the lane (it's Feb, people - you haven't learned yet?). We were afraid at halftime that failure to go to 3-2 would end up in OT!

Unfortunately they weren't running a stall offense. More like the 'run around, turn it over, wrestle around, and not hit the broad side of a barn' offense.

[Pantherdreams]

Maybe get a shot clock . . .

Other then that we have to live with this stuff.

[Rich]

I wonder if the officials showered after the game.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Maybe get a shot clock . . .

Other then that we have to live with this stuff.

Eight states have shot clocks, ostensibly to avoid stuff like this. And then the NFHS penalizes them by denying said state a seat on the rules committee.

Unless this becomes far more common, which I don't think it will, the NFHS will hold steady. Shot clocks are a lot more for officials and table personnel to think about, require upgrades that the schools have to fund, and perhaps most importantly wouldn't really have much of an impact. I don't see high school games too often where teams spend more than 20 seconds in an offensive set much less 30 or 35.

One anomalous game in Alabama does not a national trend make.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Maybe get a shot clock . . .

Other then that we have to live with this stuff.

A solution in search of a problem. These games make the news because they're rare.

[Rich]

There are crappy coaches everywhere. This game brought together two of them, obviously.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Rich

There are crappy coaches everywhere. This game brought together two of them, obviously.

What intrigues me is that two teams were doing this. Typically this is a stratedy used by a team that doesn't think it can compete at full speed. Really, really slowing down the game can frustrate the other team. Often after playing defense for 2 minutes, the team that is used to scoring a lot cranks up a crappy shot because they are frustrated.

As I recall, a game not too dissimilar to this was the straw that broke the camel's back for the NBA to insitute a shot clock. I want to say it was a multiple overtime game that ended something like 16-12 -- with only one shot taken each of the fist couple of OT periods, as the team that won the tip in the first couple of OTs held on to take buzzer shots. Tough to sell a product like that!

[Hugh Refner]

I think a 2-0 game worked out the way Dr. Naismith intended it to.

[bob jenkins]

After the first quarter, I *might* be asking the coaches if they want to shorten each quarter to something less than 8 minutes.

[Altor]

Originally Posted by Rich

There are crappy coaches everywhere. This game brought together two of them, obviously.

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

What intrigues me is that two teams were doing this.

Originally Posted by link in OP

Bibb County improved its record to 22-9, and Brookwood dropped to 19-9.

Perhaps 30+ games in a season, including 4 in one week is too much for 16-year-olds?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Adam

A solution in search of a problem. These games make the news because they're rare.

And the flip side of the problem is that in states that use the shot clock we end up with really lop-sided scores because the teams have to keep shooting every 30/35 seconds.

Didn't we just have a huge discussion about a game like that?

[Valley Man]

"If we score we might win … if they don't score we will win"

[Pantherdreams]

I get that as an official shot clock is more work. (I officiate with and without depending on which side of the border I'm on).

I will say games I work with a shot clock are far more action packed and engaging (though more difficult) then games I do without. Games without settle into a rythm very quickly and tactics become pretty evident. Games with shot clock is the same but many more broken plays or creativity on the fly by players to track. Anything could happen on a possesion particualrly late in the clock.

This is less as an official but more as parent/fan/ambassador of the sport. I would rather have high school kids (my kid or anyone elses) on a team that needs to play and make plays at in at least 50 possessions per game (absolute minimum in FIBA if both teams did nothing but hold the ball) and probably closer to 80 possessions. THen in a game where the coaches and key players on each team totally dominate a much smaller number of possessions.

As an official my pay check is better and the game is easier to officiate and anticipate when no shot clock exists. As a basketball person I prefer the games with.

[SC Official]

Who will be paying for the shot clock equipment at the rural, underfunded schools in South Carolina and other states which struggle just to pay officials' game fees?

Until this question is answered, there will not be a shot clock in high school basketball.

[APG]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Who will be paying for the shot clock equipment at the rural, underfunded schools in South Carolina and other states which struggle just to pay officials' game fees?

Until this question is answered, there will not be a shot clock in high school basketball.

Obviously you don't mandate schools have it in the next year...5-10 years or whatever to implement.

At the very least, NFHS should make it allowable by state adoption.