Trying to play devils advocate here, It would make sense that teams cannot bring in new players, maybe specifically imports, after the playoff eligibility cut off to protect teams from cutting and changing players at the tail end of the season.

I would imagine that the NBLPA would be firm on this if there is actually a rule like this.

However if it is for a legitimate injury replacement then maybe it seems abit silly.

But again, nothing really stopping a team putting a player on an injury waiver to get a stud in and then push into the playoffs, then the injury replacement player doesnt qualify so they bring the "injured player" back in now they have made the playoffs. Which wouldn't be fair for the team that missed out because of a loaned player pushed them out.

No respectable doctor will sign off on a fake injury.

Exactly right alexkrad. The rule is there to stop teams exploiting the replacement rules and turning the final few weeks of the season in to a dodgy fantasy league. There is no doubt that Childress is legitimately injured and there is no suggestion of funny business from the Kings, but the one and only rule that deals with this sort of things is there for a reason.

If the Perry suddenly suffered an "injury" and Harrington was brought in, then the Kings snuck in to the playoffs, what would people be saying then?

I'm all for amending the rule to try and allow for this situation in the future but how do you write a "you may replace an NBA stud with another because it's good for the league" rule?

5-3 in favour? Everyone but Adelaide, Melbourne and Perth voting for?

"But again, nothing really stopping a team putting a player on an injury waiver to get a stud in and then push into the playoffs, then the injury replacement player doesnt qualify so they bring the "injured player" back in now they have made the playoffs."

There is, if you simply get verification of the injury from an independent doctor. Let's stop pretending this rule has any merit.

The Kings are gone regardless. The fear is bringing a player like that in may alter how the middle 3 teams make the playoffs. Good to see JChill helping Kings with recruitment for next year !!!!

I don't think there is any fear as such, just an unwillingness to alter a rule that doesn't make sense when it comes to injury replacements.

I'm amazed that the NBL had any say in who Sydney replaces Childress with at all! What rule allows the NBL to do that?

Seems like excessive interference to me. Its a shame too, because Al Harrington would've been a great import for NBL crowds to watch!

Beantown, there is a rule stopping teams registering new players after the team has played more than 75% of their games.

It makes some sense in terms of stopping teams stacking their line-up late to make the playoffs (but really, that's what the salary and points caps are for), but it makes no sense when it comes to stopping teams replacing an injured player, where they're not gaining any benefit, just replacing what they've lost.

Give Childress an ownership stake in exchange for convincing NBA guys to play here. Haha.

So paul, you're not so much against the rule, just that the league didn't use their own discretion to allow Harrington to play?

The rule on its own is nonsense, but having a separate rule allowing players who've played with other teams in the same season to now be signed is just mind boggling.

The idea that teams would deliberately put a fit player, who's been with the team all season, on injury waivers to sign a "stud" for a few games at the back-end of the season is just stupid. The disruption in that alone would make it untenable for the team, not to mention cost etc.

Childress is legitimately injured. It would have been in the best interests of the NBL to allow Sydney to sign Harrington for the rest of the season. The signing would have generated some interest and allowed Sydney to remain somewhat competitive. As it is, they'll struggle not to get blown out in games now.

"So paul, you're not so much against the rule, just that the league didn't use their own discretion to allow Harrington to play?"

The opposite actually. I think the rule is nonsense when it comes to replacing injured players and it should have been changed long ago, this isn't the first time this has happened.

In theory it is good to stop NZ from adding Penney and Marks (though the points cap wouldn't allow it), but why would you stop a team replacing someone they've lost?

I'm a bit surprised that the league felt the need to make such a rule. Has there been any instances where an NBL team has brought a gun player in during the last few weeks of the season and its badly skewed the competition?

The Sixers brought Hodge in mid-season I think, so the rule wouldn't have prevented that. I think Perth brought someone in late a few seasons back, but I can't recall it making much difference?

I would have thought bringing in someone that late in the season is just as likely to disrupt a team as help them come home with a wet sail.

Seems like a high risk/ reward strategy to me. I think I'd be happy to allow teams to take the risk if they'd like. Especially since that player can't play in the playoffs.

For injury replacements, I'd say its even less of an issue. It's not like you can plan for your import to have a season ending injury. The league should have just allowed Sydney to make a signing that would have brought some extra entertainment for the final few games.

I know as a Sixers fan I would have enjoyed seeing my team playing next Friday with their season on the line against a suddenly unpredictable Sydney!

Easy fix. You have an independent doctor assess the injury. The NBL is a joke.

Paul said "In theory it is good to stop NZ from adding Penney and Marks (though the points cap wouldn't allow it), but why would you stop a team replacing someone they've lost?"
Great idea the points cap still exists eh.

"Give Childress an ownership stake in exchange for convincing NBA guys to play here. Haha."

best post

Does anyone know how the system works in terms of the NBL using discretion in making exceptions to the rules ? Does it have to be voted on from reps from other teams or a board.

Anon the league is not a joke, its full of great players close results and an awesome finals race. I highly doubt if you were no longer watching the NBL, that you'd be commenting on a NBL based forum. But you are correct in the fact that it is a huge mistake and will eventually cause the league to be completely made redundant and the next Childress won't bother. League is only as good as the players it attracts.

Pretty simple, if kings had 7 games left Harrington would get the green light

They don't and he can't play. Rules are rules

Should also add this is the same rule that stopped the 36rrs replacing Gilchrist and few years ago. I don't recall the anti NBL backlash back then

FYI, that'd be quite simply because the 36ers at the time weren't bringing in AL WARRINGTON, a guy who would help his team yes, but more so the profile of the NBL! Hence the rule is paralysing everyone who follows the game in this country and wants to see it flourish.

So a team that's an import short (eg Adelaide) and loses a decent enough player to free up the necessary points (Schensy?) should be allowed to bring in an NBA waivee (Josh Smith) on a 5-game contract to catapult them into the play-offs?

Even assuming that they were on track to spend most of their salary cap, at this point they could easily offer a back-ended contract where most of the money is paid next year. Not smart business, but then that's part of the reason for the rule.

It may seem unreasonable because Childress is probably the best player in the comp. But keep in mind that we have seen some pretty low-budget imports over the years.

I don't think saying the rules need to be honoured and respected means that you are therefore saying you don't want the game to grow.

Kings should have moved Perry earlier on as he has been the weak link on their roster

The league needs high profile players. Whether that be players with NBA experience or some of the best Aussie talent being piublicised as being faces of the league and hoops in this country.

Unfortunately, Andrew Gaze is still recognized as being a face of the NBL when he has not played for 10 or so years!

We need the teams and the league to pump up a player or two from each team and build up their profiles so they become recognizable and in turn their teams. Faces to names. Names to faces. That would be a good start.

Cant grow the game, the NBL has already stopped that idea.

"And those people that think signing Daniel Johnson is going to improve the publicity of basketball in SA are kidding themselves!
When are we (36ers management)going to realise that to improve the popularity of basketball in this state we need top imports from the US.
Quite simply no one gives a stuff about Motum or JOhnson!!"

No one gives a stuff about top imports from the US either if crowds and TV ratings are anything to go by.

Aussies follow teams more than players, to get the most out of bringing in good Aussie or US talent the league and clubs need to get their marketing and TV right.

Perth have done that and had huge crowds three years in a row with different lead imports of varying popularity.

Not sure if serious.

Okay, I'll bite. The existing fans may want NBA players but casual fans, with no pre-existing interest in NBL or NBA don't get excited about NBA players coming to the NBL. So it depends on whether you want to grow the league audience by appealing to the existing NBA fansthat don't follow NBL or by appealing to the wider potential audience of general sports followers. The ex-NBA player strategy probably won't work for the latter.

My analogy is my own family's experience. We went to a BBL game this year. None of us have ever played or followed cricket as a fan. My kids wanted to go because they enjoyed what they saw of it on tv, plus the Strikers were doing well. They didn't know ANY of the players and particularly had no idea that elite overseas players were involved at all. Bringing in a NEW audience to NBL (not the ones on this forum - they're already following NBL) needs to focus on what the product looks like, how it's marketed and people's desire to support a team.

How many Australian sports followers who were not NBA fans knew of Ennis, Childress, Flynn or Young pre NBL? How many know of Harrington? I had never heard of any of these guys before they started playing NBL or were mentioned on this forum. I suspect that's the case with the majority of Australian sports followers. Their appeal as ex NBA players is limited and limited to existing NBL/NBA followers.

Moreover, the NBA connections and credentials of these players (as opposed to the players themselves) appear not to have had a noticeable impact on crowds and tv audiences, as outlined in paul's post above.

Personally for me Ex NBA players are a big reason for me to get out to games. I like to see guys I have heard of, I want to see the Sixers win but also see the best Basketball talent possible.

As stated above, Australian Fans follow TEAMS first, players second. Existing fans may want to see a better quality of import, but that does nothing to get new fans to games.

Why shouldn't a team be able to replace an injured import with another import? The rule doesn't make sense in that regard.

as for "washed up NBA players" from the raving anon, we've seen what sort of quality Childress has provided... They might not know the name of the player before they got here, but the skill level will be enough to make games exciting...

It might not be a large scale, but people I know that wouldn't have watched a game for back when Gaze and Heal were playing, have been talking about the Kings and Childress and turning up to games... Not because they watched him play in the NBA, but because he's an exciting, likeable player...

THAT sort of ex-NBA quality player we should be looking to get here in droves and you'd think that if JChill is the type of player that has been great for the league, he could attract more of them...

I know, rules are rules, and you'd think that if it had happened to the 36ers in the past, same as the Kings with Corin Henry, that someone should have done something by now... They should have and haven't and are paying the price...

It just really sucks that it was just ONE game out from the limit and the chances of getting a player like Harrington in the league otherwise would have been slim to none...

Hopefully a team or the players association or SOMEONE able to take the steps, are taking them to make sure this rule is reviewed and fixed for next season... Even if it's just a proviso that only injured players (undergone test/treatment by league approved doctor) can be replaced at any time...

Pretty telling that Boti makes zero reference to the actual rule the NBL followed in "not allowing" Harrington to play, instead suggesting that the interim CEO has been hamstrung by the board.

No, he doesn't have an agenda at all!

The CEO CAN make a decision over and above the rules in the interest of the game and league

Yes I know that but the most obvious reason for him not being allowed to play is because its against the rules. No mention of that in the blog when its a pretty big part of the story.

Wookiee, I don't think Childress is your typical "wash up NBA player", this is a guy who was All-Euroleague 2nd Team (after taking a year to get his head around the international game) so he came here ready for a different style.

He plays with patience, understands the importance of ball movement, does the little things and still has regular games where he takes over despite not really dominating the ball. Super player and a super fit for the NBL.

Your agenda, Uwe Blab, is also blinded by what Boti said - that the new head honcho DOES have discretion to make the exception... He's saying that he DIDN'T because of his temporary role and wouldn't want to piss the wrong people off...

One game out of the deadline, he could have quite easily... if the fans from other teams on here and OzHoops are anything to go by, I really doubt that there'd be a significant outcry from teams and fans, they'd just be excited that they could get a similar talent to Childress AND the Kings wouldn't be hamstrung...

The potential wins for the league and restoring the Kings to a near on-par team to what they were before JChills injury, while not giving the finger to fans and sponsors and the team in general, significantly outweighs any perceived disadvantage to other teams they still have left to play.

Thanks for missing the point, Wookiee.

@Paul - I completely agree, it's the person he is that makes the difference to his game and the impact he's had on the team and league... So you'd liked to think that if HE plays that way, he can understand who else would be a good fit, or at least not suggest douchebags... Just another reason to not slap him in the face when he's found a replacement very quickly...

Best case scenario, he sticks around in Sydney next season and brings someone in with a similar mindset...

Thanks for missing the point, Wookiee.

Huh?

"The league needs to find a way to get the huge amount of NBA fans in Australia to the NBL games."

Really? "Huge Amount"?
Exactly how many Australian residents do you think ATTEND NBA games? Whilst I don't discount the possibly of a few billionaires with private jets, I'd wager the number is actually pretty small.

I imagine there's a lot of people that either subscribe to the NBA, or watch it on Foxtel, etc. So I suppose the first step could be getting decent coverage of the NBL (and/or making NBL TV less crap) and trying to convert NBA watchers over to NBL watchers. That at least would prop up the TV agreements.

Dazz, nobody said anything about ATTENDING NBA games until you did.