Basketball game ends, 2-0
 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more...2-0/ar-AA8WFqR

Both teams went into a stall, 7 shots taken total.

"The National Federation of State High School Associations claims the score tied the record for the lowest-scoring game in the history of high school basketball."

I can only imagine how I'd feel if I had wasted money to attend that game.

Did a coach get suspended?

So, did one of the pitchers throw a complete game shut-out or did they use a reliever . . . oops . . . wrong forum . . .

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

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.

Maybe get a shot clock . . .

Other then that we have to live with this stuff.

I wonder if the officials showered after the game.

I can only imagine how I'd feel if I had made 80 bucks doing that game. :cool:

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.

Yeah, but you could have taken a really good nap. :rolleyes:

That was $40 per point. Tell your assignor you want that rate for all your games. :eek:

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

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

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? :p

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

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.

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.

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!

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

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

like 30 seconds.

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.

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

Right before Christmas, I officiated a CYO JV Girls #3 game (4th graders with possibly a couple of third graders). Our score after 3 quarters was 0-0, but it wasn't from lack of trying. A lot of missed shots, turnovers, and an occasional violation was the norm, similar to scrounge's game.

During the break before the fourth quarter, I told my partner that the first team to score would win. Sure enough, the home team scored a minute and a half into the final quarter, and they held on for a 2-1 victory.

Somebody Call The Guinness World Records People ...
 

Sounds like our Catholic middle school league's junior varsity B, or C, division.

One important caveat for us, no overtime. A game that ends tied, ends tied.

(Mark Padgett would love this rule.)

So we could possibly have a 0-0 game.

I have no objection to a coin flip. ;)

According to the NFHS website, there were 3 games that were 1-0.

1 Georgetown IL vs. Homer IL (1-0), 3-6, 1930
1 Magnolia IL vs. Granville Hopkins IL (1-0), 11-20, 1929
1 Drain OR vs. Wilbur OR (1-0), 1927

Peach baskets?

North Dakota uses a shot clock, plays 18 minute halves. I believe MN is also playing halves now instead of quarters. North Dakota had a shot clock in the large schools, I believe all schools play with it now.

Yes, its an expense and 1 more person to have to pay at the table, but with time, schools found a way to do it.

It's not the expense so much as the hassle. We're lucky to get one competent clock operator.

My main issue, though, is that it's really not necessary.

This struck me as weird since I was born and raised in Illinois and now live in Oregon. I'll check my old schedules and see if I did any of those games, maybe with MTD Sr.

In the 20 or so schools I worked in this season I would trust maybe 2 to be able to handle a shot clock.

Been playing halves here in MN since the 05-06 season. I think ND only plays halves for Class A(big schools) while Class B still plays 8:00 quarters(although I may be wrong).

How many large schools can North Dakota have, 10 or 11?

Depends how you define large, too.

Having lived in Grand Forks as a child, and Minot as an adult, I know there cannot be many LARGE schools in the state. However, I know at one time North Dakota had the most millionaires per capita, so maybe they kicked in some funds.

I've always considered the HS I attended in the Chicago area as a "large" school. We had over 4000 students. There were 712 in my graduating class and I was the youngest of the 712. We're having our classes' 50th reunion this summer.

We can disagree. I think some hassle is worth thousands of extra posessions for thousands of kids.

Cost can be less then 1 set of jerseys.

While competent operators is a problem . . . see my argument re: hassle.

I work games in Maine with no shot clock. I work games in Canada with a 24 second shot clock. More kids play, more kids make decisions, more kids shoot, teams have to be deeper. Seems better for basketball.

Many more stoppages. Volunteers at most tables so anywhere between 1 or 2 and 10+ corrections a night depending on the quality of the crew. Because of timing differences (10 min quarters, 2 minutes between, etc) different bonus rules. Games just take longer anyways. Tough to get a FIBA game done in under 100 minutes. A lot are closer to 120. As an officials its a lot less pay for more work.

As a parent and basketball fan I like it a lot better.

Speaking of which, the state's fanboy site is in the midst of a seven-page thread after last weekend's stall ball game between Portland and South Portland, which was 13-13 after the fourth quarter, and a 20-16 SoPo victory. The thread is simply entitled, "SHOT CLOCK IN MAINE....NOW!!!!"

It's not going to happen. The NFHS doesn't like a shot clock, and I know our commission is against it, too. I'm with Adam about it being a solution looking for a problem, particularly where Panther cites 1-10 corrections per game. We don't need that; we have enough to do.

Not sure what the enrollment cutoff is but 21 schools play Class A basketball. To get an 8 team state tourney they have an east regional and a west regional tournament where the top 4 finishers qualify for the state tournament.

I see this problem mostly in the playoff games and most of those games are held at colleges so they would have a shot clock. I think if the shot clock is there, use it, but don't make those rural schools with barely enough players for a team but one.

You can't force a team to play with a shot clock in February and March if they haven't used one all season.

Again, just a rare issue that doesn't really need to be solved.

By rule couldn't the coaches have asked to shorten the quarters to 30 seconds each if they decided to do this? If you were the referee would you have to have a legitimate reason not to agree to shorten the quarters? Or am I taking this out of context?


ART. 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 nonvarsity game quarters may be reduced by mutual agreement of opposing coaches.

I'd be in favor of a 4 second game, providing one of the teams could hit a shot within those 4 seconds.

Yes, the coaches (and R in a varsity game) could have agreed to shorten the quarters.