I guess I’m rooting for LeBron James and the Cavs, probably because they are more interesting to me than the Magic.  The end of last night’s game was wonderful drama, something we’ll see for years to come.

But—after Hedo Turkoglu’s beautiful drive and floater that put the Magic up two with one second to go, the Cavs called timeout.  As NBA rules allow and have allowed for years, the Cavs got to throw the ball in a the opposite hash—nearly three quarters up court.

I’m not naive to the rationale, but how does that not cross the line of anyone’s sense of fair play?   In what other sport can a team advance the possession three quarters of the playing field by merely calling a time-out?  It’s silly, ridiculous, and unfair.   It’s not in the spirit of the rules of any organized sport I know and it’s wrong.


  1. You’re bitter. Should try to get laid in the next decade or so and that will fix that.

  2. The NBA has those rules so that game winning shots can be made and TNT can use its “we know drama” slogan.

  3. That rule is actually one of the few things I like about the NBA, because it’s purely about entertainment. I propose you focus your bitterness on the NFL’s defensive pass interference rule – a bigger joke in my book.

  4. Not sure how the NBA rule is without precedent. College football’s ridiculous OT positions the ball 75% of the way down the field.

    • Chris – The college football OT rule might be ridiculous, but it’s not the same thing as the NBA rule. The college situation is a tie-breaker, dead ball, both teams get a crack, and doesn’t occur in the middle of the game where position of the ball is established. It’d be like allowing a college FB team to automatically advance the ball twenty+ yards on a drive by virtue of calling a time-out.

      Lew- If you think it’s fun that’s fine. I made for interesting drama. It just seems outside the bounds of the rules of any game I know. Maybe the NBA should institute a half court shoot-off for a 6 pointer at the end of each quarter? At least each team would get a fair shot at that.

  5. I do think it’s fun and a bit outside the bounds, but what about an offensive player being able to call timeout in the middle of a play — when falling out of bounds or otherwise when in trouble? That directly punishes good defensive play. As for the half court shoot-off, that sounds suspiciously like ending a game on PKs or a shootout. Entertaining, sure, but no way to determine the outcome of a game. (Hopefully Man U and Barca won’t go to PKs….) There’s still a real half-court possession after the NBA time-out/advancement rule and the defense can still make a real stop.

  6. So if only ONE team gets to advance the ball 3/4 the way down the playing surface without working for it, it doesn’t seem fair… but if BOTH teams get to advance 3/4 of the way down the playing surface without working for it, it’s okay?!?!?

  7. Nope, I didn’t say the college OT rule was ok or fair, I just pointed out many reasons why it’s not the same issue as the NBA rule. The fact that each team gets a crack was one difference. If this was all just an attempt to get my goat with a Clintonesque argument technique, well done.

    But while we’re on that, many sports alter the field of play for OTs right or wrong (Golf going to a 1 or 3 hole play-off except for the US Open of course, soccer shoot-out, ping-pong ties are settled by a thumb wrestle in the NCAAs).

    I have yet to come up with a rule in a major sport that compares to this NBA time-out rule. Lew’s example was kind of close–being able to call a time-out while falling out of bounds, but that’s still not the same thing. Maybe next year you’ll be able to use two time-outs to earn a free throw.