Mercy Rule

[revolution]

...

[Franklin]

1) Yes, for u12s (and under) there should be a mercy rule.

2) 25 points is more than enough. If a team at u12 gets even 15 points up, chances are the other team aren't going to win even if the leading team goes back to their own baseline

3) There shouldn't be any discretion. But you need the referees to enforce it. My kids don't find it natural to retreat back. We're not allowed to play a zone so they only ever play man. In fact, in the time I've had them, most ever really play "ball" (ie, they just go to the ball!) Also, I'm "blessed" with a Scott Fisher type voice so shouting to my kids to get back after they've scored is as succesful as Scott Fisher shouting out plays during a game. I need a Dave Ingham!

Once, when I was enforcing the mercy rule because my kids were up and the other team didn't look like they had a hope of even getting the ball past their own 3 point line, I was told I was playing a zone a zone and it wasn't allowed (by the other coach!). I very patiently explained that it wasn't a zone, but a strategy to let her team get the ball over half way. Luckily the referee agreed! ... But a thought: if, in that situation, I did play a zone, would I be tech fouled, and would the other team get free throws and at least get a chance to score?? (when I called the mercy rule, it was 16-0)

Another point: doesn't your association have a code of conduct for players,coaches and parents? This could be tough for the refs (who might only be kids themselves?) but someone in the association should step in?

rev, i love the rule at dandenong, it has to be there!!! love it

[Trent]

The mercy rule should be brought in for some ABA games as well, sheesh they can get boring with a 30+ result.

Ohh yeah, the AIS did it last year by fouling out with 2:36 to go in the game.

[aussieBaller]

I think I was at that game. Unless we had that exact situation at my association.
In a grand final it should be scrapped. It was over soon as the ref enforced the rule and it was a boring game.
Ive been on the wrong side of a game like that at another association and my team fought to the end. but soon as players have to block up the key the game is over.

[revolution]

...

[Trappist Monk]

A good variation on the mercy rule is for the leading team to run back and touch their own baseline every time they score.

It allows the weaker team to progress the ball up the court and allows the leading team to play whatever their natural game is. And the faster they run, the better their chance of trapping the opposition sooner. Basically, it gives the winning team some goals as well, rather than standing around in a zone getting bored.

[Hogsbreath]

My local U12 team needs to adapt this rule every week. No team has come within 30points of them this season.

I have a number of rules that I apply the team.

* No Full Court Pressure
* No Fast Break Points (Must pull it out and setup offence)
* Must have 4 metres of spacing between players
* Team must throw at least 5 passes before a shot attempt. Enforcing the rules of motion offence (pass and cut or pass and screen away) only a couple of them really understand setting screens but it sure is rewarding watching them do it.

[BlowJoggs]

I bet the 2005 Wollongong Hawks would have appreciated some sort of 'mercy rule'. :lol:

[Franklin]

A good variation on the mercy rule is for the leading team to run back and touch their own baseline every time they score.

It allows the weaker team to progress the ball up the court and allows the leading team to play whatever their natural game is. And the faster they run, the better their chance of trapping the opposition sooner. Basically, it gives the winning team some goals as well, rather than standing around in a zone getting bored.

That does seem like a good variation. It's better than the situation where the weaker team just see the better team staring at them from half way waiting to pounce!

ANd can we apply the mercy rule to cheap swipes at the Hawks? :wink:

[Kingshood]

I remember way back when I was playing, our team came up against a team that entered into our competition but was at least 2 years younger than us. We beat them by over a 100 points. Mercy rule probably would of been a good idea.

[-Q-]

As soon as the team got 25 points in front, the senior referee diplomatically informed the coaches he was enforcing the 25 point rule. The coach of the leading team proceeded to call a time out and literally throw a tantrum on the court. He approached the referee, the opposition coach and the scorers in an attempt to prevent the rule being enforced. His main contention was the 25 point rule was going to ruin the game ("This is a championship grand final"). Ironically, it was his reaction to the rule's application that ruined the game - he instructed his team to hold the ball and not play. Although this only lasted a minute or two, he continued to make snide comments and eventually that detracted from everyone's enjoyment of the game - especially his own players, who seemed to be accepting of the rule.

The Ref should've DQ'd the coach there and then. 10 and 11 year old kids don't need a role model like that!

[Injury Queen]

I agree with the murcy rule, aslong as coaches understand why it's in place.

At my local association it's enforced at 20 points, if the coach of the lossing team requests it.

Benifits don't always out way the disadvantages of this rule.
Many coaches exploit these rules to further humiliate the opposition.

Mabey a better solution is to limit the leading team to 1 or 2 players who can deffend the ball in the back court.

This would aid the weaker team in one on one court penetation, and allow them a chance to create the extra man in offence, instead of dribbling into the front court only to face a wall of defenders.

Still it would rest on the stronger teams coaches understanding the nature of the rule. Eg placing one of his weaker deffenders on the ball not the strongest.

This not only creates opportunities for the weaker team but also a chance for him to develop his own weaker players one on one deffencive skills.

[Franklin]

At my local association it's enforced at 20 points, if the coach of the lossing team requests it.

Some coaches don't know about it?! I've done it as the stronger coach and been accused of playing a zone!


Mabey a better solution is to limit the leading team to 1 or 2 players who can deffend the ball in the back court.

This would aid the weaker team in one on one court penetation, and allow them a chance to create the extra man in offence, instead of dribbling into the front court only to face a wall of defenders.


or there's that damn zone again! (our association bans zone d for juniors)

[fahootie]

A good variation on the mercy rule is for the leading team to run back and touch their own baseline every time they score.

It allows the weaker team to progress the ball up the court and allows the leading team to play whatever their natural game is. And the faster they run, the better their chance of trapping the opposition sooner. Basically, it gives the winning team some goals as well, rather than standing around in a zone getting bored.

I think the NBL should incorporate this rule. It would make for a much more entertaining spectacle during those boring blowouts....

[RandyOrton]

They should make Pero Cameron and Ontario Lett do this every time... might get them a little fitter.. ;)

[the_referee]

My association needs a rule like this i was refereeing a u/12 boys game one team only had four players the other team had plent with in 6 minutes the team with 4 players were up by 20 points so the coach started playing with 3 players and then there got to a 60 point lead by half time so still played with 3 players but they werent aloud to dribble or they would get subbed off then finally with te minutes left they were winning about 80-4 so the coach made the players only allowed to take 3 point attempts (very talented 12 yr olds)

[FlyDog]

My association has a similar rule, 20 point lead, pull back to the defensive 3pt line. it is not on request of the coaches, it's just done. we even put in a rule in case it disadvantaged the leading team, that once the trailing team got within 15 points of the leading team, they could pick up the defense further up the floor. As yet, this part of the rule hasn't happened once.

Also, I'll add that it is very difficult to police this rule unless there is a score/dead ball situation. So that is only when the rule can be enforced. We have had grand finals prior to this rule where the score in under 10s was 40 - 0.

This rule definitely gives the team behind on teh scoreboard an opportunity to work on their offense. The point many club coaches miss is that when they are leading they "can't do anything because of the mercy rule". It never dawned on them that they could work on their halfcourt defense, applying rules etc (i'm yet to see a club team at our association that can play flawless man to man team defense). one guy even told me that "was for rep coaches to teach that sh!t".

[aussieBaller]

How can kids work on their offense if there is no defence. I'm involved at dandenong and when a team is giving us a hiding i request that the team keep playing full court because otherwise my team wont get any better. This only happened when we were a bottom age team playing 14A against a top age team. Now we are a top age team we are a better side and are alot stronger because we played against the top age teams.

One thing I Don't like is kids being forced up an age group for being too good. If they want to go up thats fine. But no association should force a team.

[Wallitron]

How can kids work on their offense if there is no defence. I'm involved at dandenong and when a team is giving us a hiding i request that the team keep playing full court because otherwise my team wont get any better.


You have to learn how to dribble and pass without defense first, otherwise noone would ever learn. A kid isn't going to learn much about basketball by picking the ball out of the bottom of the net. The only thing they are likely to learn is that they need loads of work on basic skills, or perhaps that another sport might be more fun.

I liked the idea of playing with less players, you could really teach zone or help defense basics by doing that. Also, the offensive team would surely learn the value of moving the ball via passing, and moving the defense.

Only down side is getting everyone enough minutes. You'd want a small squad if you regularly played 3 on 5. :)

[aussieBaller]

How can kids work on their offense if there is no defence. I'm involved at dandenong and when a team is giving us a hiding i request that the team keep playing full court because otherwise my team wont get any better.


You have to learn how to dribble and pass without defense first, otherwise noone would ever learn.

Thats called training. I think.

[revolution]

...

[aussieBaller]

most team think that you do have to play a zone. also all players don't have to go behind the 3pt line, they just can't play defense.

I have seen teams all they do is shoot 3's once they rule comes into play this would then defeat the purpose of the mercy rule.

I have been involved at knox also the way they get around it is that the first half in all age groups is either full court or half court man but each player must know which player they have. No Double Teaming is allowed. Otherwise first a warning is given followed by a Bench T if the coach ignores the refs request.
The second half is anything that the coach wants. This allows a closer match in most cases as the blowout only occurs in the second half and allows the kids to learn man principles. I would much perfer this and we would prob get more kids playing at a higher standard of D which is all good for Australian Basketball

[Bobby]

Believe it or not, I think some U12's need the NBA's technical foul rulings for coaches and players for the purpose of fair play.

1. Illegal defence technical fouls shall be charged, but a coach cannot be disqualified for accumulating technical fouls for illegal defence. (In 1980, the NBA eliminated the disqualification of the coach on the third illegal defence.)

2. (Smaller teams only) If a team is down to five players because of fouling out, the next player to foul out stays in the game, but will be awarded a technical and the opponent shall take one additional free throw in addition to what would be awarded. No disqualification can take place for technical fouls because of this. A similar case shall be imposed on players who foul out but must return to the game to replace an injured player -- a technical to return to the game.

You should not disqualify coaches in youth league games for players making the illegal defence violation three times.

[revolution]

...

[Homer]

The less you give the parents, coaches and referees to argue about, the better.

Yes Rev, you're correct but don't you love putting that Ugly parent back in his place after he gives you a spray and gets it totally f**ked up !!!
Usually over a 3 second call he thinks should have been called, even though 6 shots have been put up in the last 5 seconds

Ah, I love junior basketball. :roll: