Hoops

Up 1 with 2.8 on the clock

Lucky he's not with the Taipans anymore then.

"Getting a good look at three in 2.8 seconds isn't that unlikely."

Torrey Craig can do it in 0.8 :)

Getting a good look at three in 2.8 seconds isn't that unlikely.

Home team you play the gamble and should always be happy to play for overtime safe play or the win.

Away team you always bet 'all in' for the win. Going to overtime rarely benefits the away team, so clunking the last free throw would have been the better option.

Getting a good look at three in 2.8 seconds isn't that unlikely.

Lol

Perth won. It took some smart play and a freak shot to do it.
Unlikely to happen again.
They'll lose next time.

And even if you're not in the penalty (I'm pretty sure Cairns were), fouling means a dead ball and then it can be advanced with a timeout. So it undoes the only benefit of missing the free throw in the first place.

...you give them two free throws to tie the game. With two seconds on the clock. Why on earth would you want to do that?

You mean foul while up two? That would easily be the worst possible outcome.

The other strategy would be to rim it, and if you miss the board immediately foul?

So why did you pose the question to answer your own question?

Ok, so what did happen:
Worthington made the 2nd, Cats called TO. Inbounded, JJ drained the 3, and they creamed the resulting overtime. The advantage on the inbound, is that you have 5(?) seconds, so you can wait for the target to get in position. If you watch JJ, he actually ran in a circle to get himself open.

Right decision?

Back in the good ole days, a player could call a TO, but not now.
So even if Perth snatched the board, its going to be a Hail Mary.

The other strategy would be to rim it, and if you miss the board immediately foul?

Gee whiz if you cant call timeout off a rebound then you're probably better off missing the second. Don't think I've seen anyone rebound then chuck a hail Mary ever. Even on Cedric Jackson's famous half court game winter there were able to inbound from the baseline as opposed to reacting off a rebound

Yeah, I'd be more inclined to make them try put up a prayer to tie it, rather than to win it.

make the shot and take your chance on the 3pt catch and shoot

There was no dribble on this occasion, just catch and shoot.

One thing Goorjian would instruct is to make both foul shots and then foul on the dribble. That way the clock would have gone down a bit and there is no way they can win it from the line. He would then trust they would rebound the ball or make a contest of it eating up the clock.

Yeah, I'd be more inclined to make them try put up a prayer to tie it, rather than to win it.

No.

The Wildcats had a timeout left. So if you miss the free throw and they rebound it, then they can set up an inbounds play just like they did and instead the 3 means they win it in regulation instead of sending it to OT. At the end of the day Johnson's shot was catch-and-shoot so 2.8 was more than enough, in fact there was still 0.8 left after the ball went in.

Rebounding a missed free throw might've taken a second off the clock so the Cats would've still had more than 1.5 seconds for a catch and shoot.

Probably because the height of the free throw makes no difference to how much clock is used up, since the clock doesn't actually start until someone touches the ball

Why not loop it up REAL HIGH and then by the time it comes down the game has expired?

Actual answer: the clock starts at a random time, and also the buzzer to end the quarter sounds when there's a random amount of time left on the clock
[/NBL.TV]

It's not actually a matter of opinion, there's an actual rulebook. And you're wrong.

Shot clock starts when it hits the iron IMO

The clock restarts when a player touches the ball.

It seems that the Crocs have now signed up their new assisstant coach, Paul Woolpert:

http://linky.com.au/o5fq3