quiet complicated to effectively penetrate against a zone that is packed in tight, especially for young female basketballers who do not possess the pure athleticism and quickness that young men often do.

And is there really any need to come on and be negative and not positively contribute?? Especially considering the presumptions that you have made of me being a netball minded small time coach. I am not netball minded by any means, but even if I was, there is nothing wrong with that, especially considering its a volunteer position and somebody willing to give up their time to try and help people when nobody else will. If I was netball minded and asking for help wouldn't that be more of a reason to provide even more constructive help anyway??

Why dont they just shoot 2 point shots from a bit closer in. 2 out of 6 two point attempts still is better than 1 out of 6 three point attempts from the new distance.

Ushiro - I think there is a mental thing about being behind the 3 point line in terms of having spacing on the court when trying to play....also, long range 2 point jump shots are a poor shot choice in my opinion so we try to emphasise getting to the whole, mid range jumpers or shooting a 3 sort of thing

ABC123 - might be a mental thing in one way but I think the point you make about the physical thing is even more valid. Scoring points in a game is all about percentages and until the junior female players are physically able to shoot a reasonable % from the new 3 point line, they shouldnt try, if the Coach is doing his job properly.

Havent seen too many WNBL players attempt a mid to long range jumpshot with consistant success so why would junior females even think of doing the same. Unless closely gueard and on the move I never jumpshot beyond the 3 point line. A clear set shot was a lot higher % shot.

shoot your range 2s or 3s

zones in juniors is just an excuse to deaden the game - most zones are not taught properly

ps - by the way it works in juniors - so if you are after the win - run a zone

just does not add to the game.

most juniors (bar good div 1-2 players) would be 25-33% shooters from inside the paint and 20% from the key to arc and 10% from the 3.

why would you not play a zone to get a win.

I agree with Ushiro, shoot the mid-range shots and move the ball quickly to get the zone out of shape. If you have a couple of players with a bit of size, get one to recieve the ball near the FT line and have the other cut baseline behind the D. If they start focusing on the baseline cut, get one of your guards to cut hard into the key from the 45. Even if they can't get a great shot up, they can draw the foul and you're bigs are there to crash the boards. Simple, but it works for my social team.

I use the following principles against a zone. This has worked for every age group past U14, boys and girls. I also see an advantage in creating MORE space with the new line, thus making a zone weaker:
- Must have more than 5 passes;
- Must reverse the ball;
- Must look inside (and pass if open);

Maher taught this to Graf, and I think Tom got it from some US College Coach. I disagree with the excuse that girls don't have the athleticism to beat a zone, when good passing, ball movement and smarts will always beat a zone. Very hard if you don't have an inside scorer, but I've been succesful as Ushiro suggests with weak-side cuts into the seams.

Probably won't work any more Beantown - if the other teams have read this!