Stalling vs. Shot Clock

[BlueJaysLaxFan]

This has been discussed in the TLF forum, and since this is a college-level oriented forum I thought I'd start this thread here as well.

This is a recent clipping of a Mike Preston Baltimore Sun column from 3/21/07:

"...
Clock is overdue
College lacrosse needs a 30-second shot clock. I've written it the past two years, and I'll lobby for it every season until the lords of lacrosse institute one.

Lacrosse is a great sport, but it's getting harder and harder to watch. We're in an era of specialization, where everyone wants to slow it down and bring out the offensive midfielders to replace the defensive midfielders.

What ever happened to two-way midfielders? Let's go back to the old days when lacrosse was fun and the fastest game on two feet. Unless it's Syracuse, Virginia or Towson, the games can put you to sleep at times. With all the TV coverage, a 30-second clock can only help the game."

Any thoughts or reactions to this?

[Sonny]

I think a shot clock is bad news for all over college lacrosse.

The columnist in question is looking at the top handful of D1 programs - not the vast majority of other levels of men's collegiate lacrosse. Namely the low end of D1, all of D2 & D3, plus 200 plus teams at the MCLA (club) level.

The refs already have the power right now to speed up the game. Let them use it.

[Danny Hogan]

i echo sonny's sentiment, refs just need to use the stalling rules already in place

[LaxTV_Admin]

I don't believe a shot clock is the answer. If you watch teams who are not as skilled as the top tier DI programs, games with a shot clock would just be sloppy. Personally, I prefer teams slow it down to see better offensive and defensive play than just have the ball rolling out of bounce every other pass because teams are trying to force it.

Referees should utilize the rule of stalling to keep the game moving forward, and not have the ball just bounce around the outside for 3-5 minutes. I am not sure why the exchange of offensive and defensive middies matter considering that takes a maximum of 15 seconds to complete the exchange.

[mholtz]

How could teams afford this? Some of our teams have a hard enough time finding a field to play on, how could they find a field with a functioning shot clock. Wouldn't it have to be on both ends like a b-ball shot clock or a football play clock?

[Sonny]

How could teams afford this? Some of our teams have a hard enough time finding a field to play on, how could they find a field with a functioning shot clock. Wouldn't it have to be on both ends like a b-ball shot clock or a football play clock?

Many varsity programs would have trouble complying with the expense/coordination of implementing a shot clock.

[JerzWB]

i echo sonny's sentiment, refs just need to use the stalling rules already in place

I agree. I feel that (especially in the MCLA) officials do not call stalling enough. Should there be some sort of guideline in the rules? ie "team A must attack the cage/take a shot within 1 min, if not stalling is called" leaving that 1 min (around 1 min) up to the officials discretion. Or something like that?

That is the general guideline in use by the officials.

[woulax23]

here is an idea i was kicking around: what if there was a shot clock initiated, but it was only during parts of the game. For example there could be a one minute shot clock (three of the referees 20 second buzzers, with the ref announcing the beginning of the final twenty seconds) that is started when the offense first gets the ball in the box; here's the kicker, it is only initiated during the last five minutes of the first and second halves or if a team is given a stalling call at any point in the game. A new shot clock is reset if the shot hits the cage or the goalie, or if the defense gains possesion and the offense rides well enough to regain possession. Potential situation: A stalling call is made on team A and they have to keep it in the box AND a one minute shot clock is initiated, but it is not in the last five minutes of the half, or game. Question: What happens after team A shoots? Ruling: After the shot is taken, should Team A regain possession before the defense can clear the ball, Team A is not put on a new shot clock again until another stalling call is given. This gives the offense 60-70 full seconds to setup and run some sort of offense which i feel is a good amount of time, but it will also keep a fairly good flow of offensive action going. It also allows teams to run the type of offense that they would like to for the rest of the game and this will allow for competition in the last few minutes when teams tend to stall. The use of the referee's 20 second buzzers eliminates the need for visible shot clocks; after all there is no visible count for failure to advance, i mean who really watches the ref count down the seconds with his arm? We are not at the point of professionals so i think that a visible shot clock is unnecessary and simply having the officials use their buzzers and announcing when the last twenty seconds is starting will uphold what would be the spirit of the rule, which would be to keep the offensive flow of the game going and hearing the refs call out that there is "Twenty Left!" would force the offensive team to attempt to attack the goal.