Shot Clock coming for 2019

JeremyCuse

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
17,458
Likes
13,641
#5
I'd think once you get in the box right?
I would assume so, would make it easy to track and not have to do it by possession which if theres a scrum could change 3-4 times in 10 seconds. Once your in the box the clock would start. Not sure if there would be some mechanism that re-sets or gives you extra time. Say you shoot with 5 seconds goalie makes a great save and you get the ball back. Does the clock keep running to zero, does it re-set to say 30 seconds?
 

Hoo's That

All American
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
6,529
Likes
8,558
#6
I would assume so, would make it easy to track and not have to do it by possession which if theres a scrum could change 3-4 times in 10 seconds. Once your in the box the clock would start. Not sure if there would be some mechanism that re-sets or gives you extra time. Say you shoot with 5 seconds goalie makes a great save and you get the ball back. Does the clock keep running to zero, does it re-set to say 30 seconds?
I would imagine they would continue to use the rule that ends the shot clock they have now - a reset occurs if you hit the goalie, the pipe, or the other team gets possession and you take it back. What I could see is 90 seconds if you get it in your own end and 60 if you get a reset under the rule. There's talk of changing the basketball shot clock to 20 seconds after an offensive rebound, based on the idea the extra 10 seconds is used to cross the half-court line.
 

laxsummit

2nd String
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
537
Likes
295
#7
Understand each team's offensive scheme and pace is different but doubt this change impacts current play much beyond removing subjectivity on stall call. If anything, might change defensive approaches.

Cuse O stagnated at times but think O usually flowed enough that we got the shot we wanted well within ninety seconds. Really don't see it affecting us, we don't play fast or slow, say uptempo best describes. Sometimes Refhuss held ball behind cage for awhile when not challenged waiting for cutters to open so that play may have to be initiated earlier (can't recall if that was done mostly on man up or not)

Would think 90 secs starts with entry into box and the bigger question is how much time is reset
 

JeremyCuse

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
17,458
Likes
13,641
#9
Understand each team's offensive scheme and pace is different but doubt this change impacts current play much beyond removing subjectivity on stall call. If anything, might change defensive approaches.

Cuse O stagnated at times but think O usually flowed enough that we got the shot we wanted well within ninety seconds. Really don't see it affecting us, we don't play fast or slow, say uptempo best describes. Sometimes Refhuss held ball behind cage for awhile when not challenged waiting for cutters to open so that play may have to be initiated earlier (can't recall if that was done mostly on man up or not)

Would think 90 secs starts with entry into box and the bigger question is how much time is reset
This will only hurt SU when they run the second and third midfield lines as we sometimes slow the pace down to try and draw out the possession. Other then that this great news for us as while we don't play that super quick style anymore ala Casey and Mike Powell we are still an uptempo team that plays a fast paced style. Teams like us, UVA, Albany, Duke to a lesser extent, Cornell, and others will really benefit from this change. This will be bad to horrible news for teams like Army, Maryland, Towson, Bryant, Hopkins, etc as they prefer to play a much slower paced game though Hopkins has tried to move away from that a bit the last few years. This will also be devestating to non power Div 1 teams trying to upset a top 10 team. Without the ability to stall and really drag out possessions they will struggle to keep games in reach.
 
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
89
Likes
125
#10
For the last few games of the season it was cool to see Peter Dearth play at least closer to a traditional two-way middie than we have seen in a while. Any sort of shot clock could lead to us continuing to develop players for that role like the good ol days. In the handful of times Dordevic was stuck on defense and had to guard someone it looked like he could definitely be up to the task with his freakish athleticism. Hopefully this leads to some creative changes to our approach.
 

Hoo's That

All American
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
6,529
Likes
8,558
#13
This was posted on our board by an anti-Lars person (but that's neither here nor there to you folks). Various coaches were interviewed about "playing fast". One of them was Scott Marr at UAlbany. Petro was pretty much admitting he won't change nothing for nobody.
 

CreaseRat

2nd String
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Messages
506
Likes
294
#14
I’m hearing Danowski is anti shot clock and wrote an email to all the coaches stating why he is against it. He talked about how he coached in three different scenarios over the last 6 months and doesn’t see a need for the shot clock. Wouldn’t be surprised to see him rallying the troops to delay the shot clock era.

I’d like to see them shorten the sub box back to 10 yards and see what happens to pace of play then.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
459
Likes
365
#15
I’m hearing Danowski is anti shot clock and wrote an email to all the coaches stating why he is against it. He talked about how he coached in three different scenarios over the last 6 months and doesn’t see a need for the shot clock. Wouldn’t be surprised to see him rallying the troops to delay the shot clock era.

I’d like to see them shorten the sub box back to 10 yards and see what happens to pace of play then.
That is who likes it ...coaches who want to control every possession and situation. This is not how the game should be played. It is meant to be free flowing. Not all this passing around substituting garbage. Let the kids play free without this junk. Every game I want to yell timer on. I hate putting it in officials hands to decide who is stalling.

I also think the shot clock will limit the power of the Face-Off. They win the draw and just keep it forever.

No reward for good defense they just keep the ball or do a courtesy shot over the net to make it look like they are going to the net. I bet ncaa and nba basketball coaches would like no shot clocks so they could run stupid plays over and over.
 

OrangeXtreme

The Mayor of Dewitt
Staff member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
91,004
Likes
112,145
#16
That is who likes it ...coaches who want to control every possession and situation. This is not how the game should be played. It is meant to be free flowing. Not all this passing around substituting garbage. Let the kids play free without this junk. Every game I want to yell timer on. I hate putting it in officials hands to decide who is stalling.

I also think the shot clock will limit the power of the Face-Off. They win the draw and just keep it forever.

No reward for good defense they just keep the ball or do a courtesy shot over the net to make it look like they are going to the net. I bet ncaa and nba basketball coaches would like no shot clocks so they could run stupid plays over and over.
You still need a legal shot on cage to satisfy the shot clock. Thats a shot that hits the pipe or the goalie. Courtesy lobs over the cage don't count.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
136
Likes
44
#19
I am generally against the shot clock, but it is hard to ignore Pietramala's point in the Sun article:
“I think a shot clock allows for more consistency, and the adjudication of the rule becomes easy,” he said. “The clock goes on and the clock goes off. You’re getting consistency in the adjudication of the rules. I just think these guys have so much on their plates, from officiating the game to rules to timekeeping, and it’s way too much.”

I have seen too much uneven application of the timer. So probably a 90 minute shot clock with a 60 second reset is reasonable.

I think if they add the shot clock, they need to bring back the old "keep it in rule" for the last few minutes of the game to allow the team behind a better chance of getting the ball away.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
459
Likes
365
#20
I think if they add the shot clock, they need to bring back the old "keep it rule" for the last few minutes of the game to allow the team behind a better chance of getting the ball away.
They won't need it because the shot clock will already be in effect. The most a team can kill will be 60 to 90 seconds depending on what is decided.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
136
Likes
44
#21
They won't need it because the shot clock will already be in effect. The most a team can kill will be 60 to 90 seconds depending on what is decided.
Uh, 60 or 90 seconds would be a lot of time to be allowed to run around the whole offensive half field at the end of a 1 goal game.

I've actually already noticed the problem this season with the timer. A lot of close games end up just fizzling out at the end, instead of being exciting.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
459
Likes
365
#22
Uh, 60 or 90 seconds would be a lot of time to be allowed to run around the whole offensive half field at the end of a 1 goal game.

I've actually already noticed the problem this season with the timer. A lot of close games end up just fizzling out at the end, instead of being exciting.
So it is a 60 second shot clock except for the end of the game when it is 30? That doesn't seem fair. In the old game you could run around for 2minutes and kill time at least this is 60 to 90 seconds.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
136
Likes
44
#23
No, in the old game, they had the keep-it-in rule.
The referees would give the signal and after that the offensive team had to keep it in the box.
Keeping it in the box restricts the area the offensive team has to run around in, giving the defense a better chance to get the ball.
 

Hoo's That

All American
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
6,529
Likes
8,558
#24
That is who likes it ...coaches who want to control every possession and situation. This is not how the game should be played. It is meant to be free flowing. Not all this passing around substituting garbage. Let the kids play free without this junk. Every game I want to yell timer on. I hate putting it in officials hands to decide who is stalling.
{snip}
A couple of the coaches in the video I linked said they're going to have to "let go of the controls" more under a shot clock than they do now.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
459
Likes
365
#25
No, in the old game, they had the keep-it-in rule.
The referees would give the signal and after that the offensive team had to keep it in the box.
Keeping it in the box restricts the area the offensive team has to run around in, giving the defense a better chance to get the ball.
I remember. the offense ran around inside the box for 2 minutes. The defense rarely got the ball as I recall. They would take the goalie out and double team. Maybe I am wrong but felt like it was still a long offensive advantage under 2 minutes back in the day.

Sometimes an offensive player would forget and run outside or throw it outside the box.
 


Top Bottom