It’s just in practice in a few leagues currently (internationally)…..but just wanted to toss it to the board to see your thoughts. I personally LOVE IT. it’s called the “Elam ending”. Completely changes how basketball games end. We can all agree that currently, teams play up and down, try to play good defense, for 39 minutes. Then, if you are down late….the strategy changes 100% and good defense no longer matters. You foul intentionally and hope they miss. Over and over. It can turn a beat flowing game into the longest drag it out minute. Someone posted our last minute took like 10 minutes. And doing something negative (fouling)…..to be your only chance…..that just isn’t right. So enter Elam ending. In a nutshell, the game is played normal, and the clock shuts off at 4:00. No more clock. The game also stops as if it were 0:00. At that point, the winning team adds 7 to their score. That’s the new target number. For instance if the score is 71-65 at the 4:00 mark….. time out. Reset. Jump ball to start. The game will be played until one team reaches 78. (71 + 7). Some benefits….. 1. Since time doesn’t matter, the trailing team has a shot, no matter how big they are down…..but just do so by playing tough D and good offense. 2. Fouling would be a huge negative, which it should be. 3. Every game would end on a made walk off basket. The main thing that sold me…..with the exception of normal games coming to a screeching halt in the last minute….is… Imagine if we’d always played by Elam ending. And someone suggested we just play like we currently do…:.just play til the clock runs out. And if you are down, foul, foul, foul maybe they’ll miss a few. It would get zero traction. The UConn game is another example of dragging an ending. Looking back at the UConn game, if it had Elam ending…..at the 4:00 mark UConn was up 61-58. Game would stop, clock turned off….first team to 68 would win. So……here’s your finish. Condon free throw. 61-59 Walt hits three. 61-62 Richard’s dunk. 61-64 Ball hits three 64-64 Condon makes FT 64-65 (Condon misses FT, Martin slaps it out, Walt drives and is fouled). Walt makes two free throws 64-67 Walt makes 3. 64-70 BALL GAME.
Interesting. I would prefer the refs call an intentional foul when the defense intentionally fouls. ANYONE can see the fouls are intentional, especially when the coach is on the sideline screaming FOUL, FOUL, FOUL!!
The only time I can remember intentional fouls being called is on a breakaway and someone gets grabbed when they have a wide open run at the other end. I just wish they would go to 4 quarters and have the bonus reset each quarter. It doesn't fix end of game directly, but too many games have 1 or both teams in the double bonus with 10 mins to play. At least if they reset, the team that's down may only have 2-3 fouls so they have to give 3 fouls before shots are taken and every inbounds the clock would run more before you got into a foul shooting contest.
Elam ending is the way; I was skeptical when I first heard about it, but it sounded interesting. Once I saw it in play (maybe in the TBT games), I was sold. Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
Free throws don’t bother me. I love the analytical approach of who to foul, when, can an individual step up, the drama. The replays are what bothers me and slows it down too much.
They should have never reduced the number of balls for a walk from 6 to 4. But I stopped watching when they allowed pitchers to use a rosin bag. Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
I don’t think this wouldn’t change the game much, because while it would increase the potential cost of a foul, it would do nothing to reduce the potential benefit (a win). If a team is up by 2 and gets the ball with 28 seconds left, what is the other team to do? They can’t just let the clock run out, so they will still foul. Maybe the ref calls an intentional foul, but all this does is make it harder for the team that is behind to catch up. And probably we don’t want that. The Elam ending has the advantage of reducing the increasing the cost of fouls without closing off the path to victory for that the team that is behind. I’m still not 100% sure I would want college to adopt it, but it does seem like it would have the potential to solve the problem.
I was confused about this too until I re-read his post and realized that there is no clock after the 4:00 mark, just first team to the calculated score then game over. Also holding the ball (4-corners) does no good, because your team has to get to that score so it does no good to play keep-away from the other team.
Not sure what rule you mean. I love some and don’t love some. Pitch clock is AWESOME. Limiting pickoff attempts, not good. DH? That one’s weird because it was a rule for half the league, and an opposite rule for the other half. Had to align them.
What’s to stop a team from fouling at the 5 minute mark to catch up before the 4 minute mark when the clock shuts off?
Fouling is a desperation strategy, worth only when you have no other chance of winning the game. So, it only makes sense when you are running out of time. If there is still 5 minutes to go, you are better off trying to win the normal game without wracking up too many fouls.
when you can obviously hear the coach telling him to foul foul foul that is an intentional foul when they do it. 2 shots and the ball just like any other intentional foul at any other point in the game.
I understand, I’m not complaining about how the game is being played. I’m just asking if the above rule change is to happen to help speed up the end of the game. If I’m a coach relying on the fouling to try to win the game, I’m gonna start fouling at the 5 minute mark now if I can. That way I have a chance to close the gap before having unlimited time to score 7+ the score at the 4 minute mark.
There’s clearly an understanding in these scenarios, and I’m fine with it. If refs started calling intentional fouls in those cases, coaches would just start yelling in coded language, “Full pressure!” or “Buffalo soldier!”, and players would make more of an effort to look like they’re going for the ball. And then we would basically end up in the same situation as we are now, only less transparent and maybe with a couple more seconds drained from the clock.
The key question is, hawaii, “would my team have a better scoring margin if we start fouling?” If the answer is yes with 5 min to go with an Elam ending, then yes you should start fouling. But if the answer is yes with 5 minutes to go with an Elam ending, it’s also probably yes with 6 min to go or after the clock is off. The answer is likely even yes if your team is winning! With an Elam ending, the expected returns of fouling are entirely unconnected to the clock. Either fouling helps you or it doesn’t, but fouling at the end offers no special value.
I agree. I’m just saying realistically it’s just shifting the goal post as to when you will foul….if you think fouling will help.
I don’t think it moves the goal posts though, because usually no team actually thinks fouling will help them. Typically, the value of fouling is entirely generated by the running down of the clock itself. Hack a Shaq was a rare exception, and the value of that strategy would be the same under a standard or Elam ending. But the kind of fouls that UConn committed at the end the game on Sunday would simply not have occurred under an Elam ending, as UConn wasn’t fouling because fouling was expected to best improve their margin of victory. They were only fouling because the game would have ended if they didn’t.
