A radical way to end the endless fouling: The Elam Ending

[Plebe]

Elam Ending to once again be used in all TBT 2019 games

The Basketball Tournament (TBT). Become a fan, support the winning team, and you could grab a share of the $1+ million prize! #TBT2020

www.thetournament.com

The Elam Ending attempts to address the anticlimactic tedium of endless intentional fouling by the losing team in the last few minutes of a game. It is being implemented in The Basketball Tournament (TBT), currently ongoing.

"For those new to TBT, let's take a step back for a moment. Prior to the 2017 tournament, Mensa member and college professor Nick Elam blindly emailed TBT a 67-page document with a way to eliminate endless fouling at the end of games. Under the rule, at the first dead ball after the four-minute mark in the fourth quarter, the game clock shuts off. A target score is set by adding seven points (it has since been changed to eight) to the leading team's score. The first team to reach the target score wins. ...​

​

"After testing it out at the 2017 Jamboree, TBT decided to implement the rule change for all games last summer. The results were eye-opening. Not only did fans embrace the concept, but it led to a noticeably better end of game experience both on the court and in the stands. "​

Elam Ending to once again be used in all TBT 2019 games

The Basketball Tournament (TBT). Become a fan, support the winning team, and you could grab a share of the $1+ million prize! #TBT2020

www.thetournament.com

 

[nwhoopfan]

Who doesn't love an endless procession to the FT line and a minute or two of game clock stretching to 10 or 15 minutes of real time?

 

[mbr33ct]

I just want to know if UConn could have won any more NC if this Elam Ending was in play for the last 3 years?

 

[Majic Hands]

I'm under the impression that the foul rule in basketball for an intentional foul is two free throws and the ball out of bounds. If officials would simply call and enforce that rule the Merry-Go-Round to the free throw line at the end of games would stop.

At some point even the talking heads would stop saying " they're going to have to start fouling if they want to have a chance to win this game".

 

[Alydar]

Who doesn't love an endless procession to the FT line and a minute or two of game clock stretching to 10 or 15 minutes of real time?

Listen to the announcers for ESPN. They all lament the end of endless freethrow attempts late in the game. To them the 1 and 1 was the soul of basketball. Of course foul stoppages do give them dead time to fill with talk, which is better than now with them talking about anything but the game in front of them while the game is being played.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

I honestly don’t have a huge problem with this. It happens loss often than you think, only when a game is 2 or 3 possessions at the 90 second mark

 

[Centerstream]

I'm under the impression that the foul rule in basketball for an intentional foul is two free throws and the ball out of bounds. If officials would simply call and enforce that rule the Merry-Go-Round to the free throw line at the end of games would stop.

At some point even the talking heads would stop saying " they're going to have to start fouling if they want to have a chance to win this game".

I agree with you on this concept but I am guessing that the refs only call an intentional foul when the player with the ball has a clear run to the basket and is then mugged by an opponent. Even at the end of the game when the ref is next to a coach that is screaming "foul, foul" to his players, the refs will not call it as intentional foul.

 

[Dokey]

I honestly don’t have a huge problem with this. It happens loss often than you think, only when a game is 2 or 3 possessions at the 90 second mark

I have seen three possession leads bring on multiple fouls in under 30 seconds.

 

[southofnorth]

Eh, I don't think this really solves anything because it just gives the losing team more of a chance to hack and slash their way to the finish line. Keep intentionally fouling the worst free throw shooter and then play overly aggressive on offense? I don't think that solves it. I'd much rather have the intentional foul call. Basically consider any foul after the 2 minute mark intentional. Idk if that would necessarily solve it or what the best solution is, but turning a timed game into soccer ("timed") seems unfair to teams that have played hard and honestly.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I just want to know if UConn could have won any more NC if this Elam Ending was in play for the last 3 years?

I can't answer your question directly, but I made a best guess, and the answer is "No."

Looking at the play-by-play (as shown on ESPN) and using the 4th quarter 5 minute mark as a surrogate for the first time out after 4 mins, the first team to the then leading team's score plus 8 points was UConn's opponent (although the Mississippi State game would have had to go into overtime to get to those extra 8 points scored).

 

[eebmg]

Eh, I don't think this really solves anything because it just gives the losing team more of a chance to hack and slash their way to the finish line. Keep intentionally fouling the worst free throw shooter and then play overly aggressive on offense? I don't think that solves it. I'd much rather have the intentional foul call. Basically consider any foul after the 2 minute mark intentional. Idk if that would necessarily solve it or what the best solution is, but turning a timed game into soccer ("timed") seems unfair to teams that have played hard and honestly.

I have watched enough of the TBT games that use the Elam ending to be convinced that it does remove intentional fouling. There is no reason to hack any player to the free throw line since playing straight up good defense is a superior strategy. (Plus make your FT's).

Not sure what is unfair. Both teams play by the same rules.

And the Elam endings when the game is really close or tied is actually very
intriguing with incredible pressure packed final moments as both teams try to get that last score and it could be quite a few possessions Mark me as a believer.

 

[BroadwayVa]

I agree with you on this concept but I am guessing that the refs only call an intentional foul when the player with the ball has a clear run to the basket and is then mugged by an opponent. Even at the end of the game when the ref is next to a coach that is screaming "foul, foul" to his players, the refs will not call it as intentional foul.

I agree with all that believe the fouls at the ends of game ARE INTENTIONAL. As such, as a purist, those calls ALL should be called what they are INTENTIONAL. Should that happen then the coaching staffs will see that normally it is foolhardy to intentionally (2 shots with the ball) foul. The potential of getting the ball is the intent now with that taken away---why foul??
Each year the NCAA has a new "Emphasis" this should be the emphasis until fouling at games end--ends.

 

[eebmg]

I agree with all that believe the fouls at the ends of game ARE INTENTIONAL. As such, as a purist, those calls ALL should be called what they are INTENTIONAL. Should that happen then the coaching staffs will see that normally it is foolhardy to intentionally (2 shots with the ball) foul. The potential of getting the ball is the intent now with that taken away---why foul??
Each year the NCAA has a new "Emphasis" this should be the emphasis until fouling at games end--ends.

That is why the Elam ending is so intriguing. The ref's will never call the intentional fouls like they should so taking the decision out of their hands is fine with me.

 

[asuwish]

I agree with you on this concept but I am guessing that the refs only call an intentional foul when the player with the ball has a clear run to the basket and is then mugged by an opponent. Even at the end of the game when the ref is next to a coach that is screaming "foul, foul" to his players, the refs will not call it as intentional foul.

As a former coach the very definition of "Intentional" foul is when you tell the player to foul. Fouling a player who is nowhere near the ball for the purpose of putting them on the foul line to stop the clock and give that team a chance for only 2 pts not 3 is intentional. The ref would be blind or ignorant, and they are neither not to see this. By calling it what it is and not only getting two shot but most importantly the ball back to take any advantage away from the other team would in fact change what teams would do. My guess is teams would have to take more risks with trapping and trying to cause steals or turnovers, or real fouls making a real play on the ball

 

[Steelerone]

If they were truly serious about ending the unending string of fouls they would simply enforce the "intentional" foul rule where the other team also gets possession. How many times have we seen the defensive player actually grab the offensive player and a simple foul is called. The refs have the ability to call it but for some reason they never do.

 

[stamfordhusky]

If they were truly serious about ending the unending string of fouls they would simply enforce the "intentional" foul rule where the other team also gets possession. How many times have we seen the defensive player actually grab the offensive player and a simple foul is called. The refs have the ability to call it but for some reason they never do.

The biggest reason is that if they start calling intentional fouls when the player with the ball is fouled, the coaches/players will adjust and instead of gently wrapping up a player, they will instead aggressively go for the ball and just happen to commit a hard foul as they do it. A bunch of hard fouls in the final minute of a game may cause game management problems they don't want.

 

[Yorkeez4]

On the surface I like this idea but it would eliminate ot games which are generally very exciting. If this was in play years ago the men’s 6 ot game with Syracuse would have never happened.