Wisconsin Changes
 

Winter Sports Impacted by Board Actions > Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association

Curious to hear what those of us in Wisconsin think about the switch to two halves and a longer game (on the varsity level only)

MN has been doing 18-minute halves since I started officiating basketball.

I personally like it; but if they wanted to go back to quarters I wouldn't really care.

I've heard objections basically raised on two fronts:
1) 4 extra minutes of game time with out a corresponding increase in officials pay. (meh, whatever). Easily solved by either raising officials pay (hahahaha) or going to 16-minute halves.
2) Coaches like having the "free" timeout between quarters. Could be remedied, if necessary, by either declaring an officials timeout following the first whistle after the halfway mark of the half, or by granting each team an extra timeout with the stipulation that at least one 'use it or lose it' timeout per team per half.

Would you really want two extra time-outs per game and a game that's 4 minutes longer? Because you know every coach would make sure to use the "use it or lose it" TO, even if they're down 50.

Yet another state that will do something their own way at the expense of giving up any potential seat on the NFHS rules committee. Small price to pay if you feel like what you're doing is right for your state.

The timing of this decision, however, is curious. Considering the NCAA women's rules committee just decided to revert to playing the game in quarters. It is interesting that there is nothing even close to consensus on this issue among the various levels of play.

I thought the same thing about NCAA-W when I read this.

I've heard the explanation for why the women went to quarters, what is the driving motivation for Wisconsin to switch to halves? To me this just seems like change for the sake of change, with no real purpose.

Okay, scratch my question. The purpose was to increase the game time to 18 minute halves.

Don't you have "TV timeouts"? :rolleyes:

Why is that even an issue?

Just permit 1-2 more games per season if they want more total playing time. That way, they don't have to muck with the game rules.

Hey, It Works For Hockey ???
 

How about three fifteen-minute periods. To make extra money, the home team can sell advertising on the Zamboni.

Personally, I love it. Name one thing about this that is negative from an official's standpoint OTHER than playing 4 extra minutes per game.

Yeah, I don't disagree with you. As I said, it seems like a solution in search of a problem.

From an officiating perspective, I like it too. Mostly just because we essentially get rid of two timeouts. I just don't see any benefit to the game in general, and thus no reason for the state to make this change.

Playing quarters instead of halves in basketball at any level has never made sense. At least in the NBA, they have certain foul rules tied to the quarters. The presence of quarters means the game is harder to play and officiate. There are 4 potential last second shots to rule on, and 4 times to "play" for the last shot. The latter interrupts the normal flow of the game. Plus, in a game with either a good flow or a wide margin, there's likely no need for what would be the 3rd quarter TO.

I have had a game where we've had 3 buzzer beater shots. I think we got them all right, but at least 2 of them might have gone to replay if we were in a college game.

And what would be wrong with 9 minute quarters? Are odd numbers just not cool?

However, I agree that from an officiating perspective, halves aren't too bad. But something tells me that WIAA didn't have officials in mind when making the change.

Eliminating quarters gets rid of two last second shots and two AP throw ins (not a big deal granted).

I don't see a big deal in changing...well except NCAA women just went to quarters, so much for greater consistency.

Here are two: more fouls, more free throws.

Sometimes when officiating small schools without depth, the middle of the first half often gets very disjointed. Kids could use the break but coaches seem wary of using their timeouts for this reason.

One of the reasons behind NCAAW's switch to quarters was to fall in line with the way the game is played at all other levels of the sport. NCAAM is now the only code that plays halves.

Nope, for me NCAAW is the only code that plays quarters. :D

I'm not saying I'd want two extra timeouts per game, I'm saying that they could be added if the coaches think it's a huge concern.

As for the "game that's 4 minutes longer" thing... it's already 4 minutes longer in MN, so that doesn't really make a difference to me.

What's the purpose of going to halves but turning around and giving the teams 2 more time-outs?

HS games are agonizing enough at 32 minutes, I definitely have no desire to add an extra 4 minutes to it.

I'm an assigner for 22 schools for conference varsity games.

I've already had a couple of people ask if the fees will go up since the game length is increasing by 12.5%. I've answered truthfully -- it's unlikely in the short term.

I've seen Facebook threads where others have shut down those questions cause "the schools have no money" and the usual canard of "do it for the children."

All our officials for 2015-16 are contracted for a certain rate. Why should they work 4 extra minutes every night without being able to ask that question (and without being ridiculed for asking)?

Are you saying you want to take away playing time from those fourth string girls riding the end of the bench?? How dare you!

Chances are they will not be playing the extra 4 minutes. (Of course, you already know that) ;)

Here in Oregon, they have a solution for that....the 5th quarter. Some Freshman or JV games are scheduled with a 5th quarter.. It is played 1st and isn't played by the usual starters/subs. It isn't included in the game score. It gives those less skilled players chances to get on the court and play a while....and the officials get 25% more than a 4 quarter assignment.

That would be nice.

Middle School Junior Varsity Game ...
 

Similar here in Connecticut for many of our public middle school leagues. The extra time is after the "regular" game, usually ten minutes of running time.

The public MS league in which I officiate plays five periods.

• First half: Three four-minute periods. All players must play at least one full period. the best players have to start, the next five talented players play the second period, etc. (Exception: Teams with 16 or more players can request a stoppage with 2:00 left in period #3 to enter the players that haven't yet played.)
• Second half: Two six-minute periods. For teams with 8 or more players, players can play no more than 3-4 periods for the entire game (depending on squad size).

The third period can be very painful to watch... and officiate.

They might know it anyway and I'm not one for trying to hide it from them but is it really necessary or helpful to formalize it and declare a certain set of players as the weakest five?

Well, that is just bizarre. Who is ranking these players as the "best five", "worst five" etc. Seems like something that somebody drew up on paper and thought it was a brilliant idea. When in reality it is an absolutely terrible idea in every way possible.

I've subsequently revised my comment with your feedback in mind.

I agree. Before I officiated (when I was lived up to my screen name), a friend of mine coached MS basketball and our league merged with this one. Initially, he and his assistant planned their first half strategy not knowing this was the rule until the pre-season league meeting.

The idea is good in theory, but it's not good in practicality/actuality.

Personally, I like what our local CYO league does for its JV level program (grades 4-6):

• All players must participate in at least two quarters (any amount of time in each).
• No player may play all four quarters (doable if the team has 7 or more dressed).
• For games going to overtime, there's no restrictions on who can play in the extra period(s).

This may not be a perfect solution either, but the majority of CYO JV coaches have a system in place to make it work and get everyone in the game within the spirit/letter of the rule. I'd rather see this than the five-period setup popular in the some of area's public middle school leagues.

No. It is a bad idea even in theory.

That is a lot better.

In our local kids rec league (B & G grades 3-12) the only playing time rule is that any player that shows up for the game and who attended both of that teams practices during that week plays at least two quarters. Here's the best part. Any complaints by parents about their kids playing time must be directed at the head coach, not the officials. If the parent wants to complain further, they go to the Board of Directors.