Nothing to do with refs, it was all for a 2 hour broadcast slot

I believe that it has/had more to do with FIBA v NBA rules and media (read TV) requirements with time slots (90 mins v 120 to 150 mins of air time).

From a personal point of view, I don't mind the urgency that the shorter game brings to the contest. The longer the contest, the more time to catch up = less urgency throughout the (whole) contest. I know which game I'd rather watch.

Now, a good game will often end up in an OT or 2. That's the game I want to go for a longer time. Once again, it's probably that urgency thing again for each OT. 5 mins, win or lose. And hey, you get 45 mins a game or more for good games, just not all games.

Now, what about the players, especially the end of the bench who miss out on reg mins? I really don't think that the top comp in the country, on a national stage, is where you go to improve. That's for training and/or off-season contracts in say, state leagues or even personal preparation.
Guys & Girls in the NBL/WNBL are the best in the country. They got there by being the best. And you will still get even better in these leagues, firstly in their training squads, then as you EARN court time. However, the leagues are not there for that purpose. They (NBL/WNBL) are the goals, not the stepping stones.
Those players you say you want to see more of. Really, that applies to parents/family and basketball superfans. Parents/family can always revel in their kins skills at state league levels where they will be worth watching having an influence on the result, not just junk mins in an already decided outcome. The basketball superfans will know how to follow their favs.

Leave it as it is!

48 mins all the way for me. I like the idea that some of the 8,9,10 players can get a few minutes during the game and getan opportunity to get into the teams rotation. The Next Stars Program is built so the kids can train but also playing a few minutes always is good for their development.

It was done for tv, but as was said it also happens to keep games closer. I personally think playoffs should go for 48.

Eliminate video replays and limit time-outs to one 120s "TV timeout" at the 6 minute mark of each quarter. Make first foul shot worth 2 points in any shooting foul situation. Shorten half time to 10 minutes.

Those changes will reduce dead time and you should be able to get 48 minutes of game time into a 2 hour time slot.

If you want 48 minute games, you either do the above sorts of changes to reduce dead time or you wait until the game is popular enough that the broadcasters are willing to increase the air time available per game. And isn't NBL paying the production costs of tv coverage? They wouldn't get any return on investment from paying for longer time slots, so what's in it for them right now?

30+ years of records through the window enough said. Go back to 48

Curtly

How could the league run 48 min games only for playoffs? The game is different in its nature with the extra 8 minutes playing time. The teams seriously challenging for the championship would need to run deeper benches.

I think it's a moot point, because the games are 40 minutes due to tv time slots.

I can watch basketball and AFL even if they are in the same week.
When I was a kid basketball was on in Winter again I managed with both.

Yes, bring it back asap.

True Jicko.
Bairstow's 21.8mpg could increase to around 25-26 in a 48min game.
Superstar.

I personally preferred the 48 minute games with longer breaks. Now there's not even time for a piss at quarter time.

I also personally think that with 6 or 7 players on the bench, 48 minutes would be better.

That said, I don't feel particularly strongly either way.

Not sure how to achieve it, especially with percentage now the splitter, but I'd also like to see a return to the days when coaches would run the bench once the game was beyond doubt.

Quarter time is the same length it's been since 1996.

Would also prefer better quarter breaks I usually take a piss at three quarter time. Agree Dazza.

Personally I'd prefer 48minutes as some games in the stands seem to be over in a blur and an added 8 minutes would hopefully increase the feeling of value for money.

Ultimately yes it's LK's decision but you'd imagine he'd have some Americans voicing their opinions on wanting 48 minute games and rules that more closely resemble the NBA to help their Next Star but only time will tell whether he values those opinions enough to make rule changes.

Keep FIBA rules and timing. Keep our players and coaches with the rest of the world.

If FIBA increase, then we do. Otherwise a 30 pt blow out becomes a 50pt one. Just not worth it.

I want to watch the top 8 players slug it out. Player 9-11 really aren't worth watching.

In basketball the feeling you get watching a 30 point loss isn't that much different to a 50 point loss (you feel like nothing goes right, you keep turning the ball over, shot isn't dropping and you defence is atrocious)... AFL where scoring can come on extremely quickly you notice the difference more.

It was never changed for TV, it was changed so the league was in-line with the FIBA standard.

Now there are 3 ways to go about this:

1 - Have the NBA change to 40 mins (not ever going to happen)
2 - Have FIBA change the standard to 48 mins (would be preferred, but won't happen)
3 - Have Larry change the NBL to 48 mins (most likely to happen, but who knows if it will?)

Ideally, #2 would be the way to go. The problem I have with 40 mins is that NBL players are conditioned to playing 8 less minutes than NBA players and when it comes to international games, US players have better stamina.

Also, I can't remember which game it was, but in one of the NBA x NBL games last season, the NBL team hung in for most of the game. But when it got towards the end of the game, they ran out of puff.

My opinion - I don't care either way, but 48 mins = 8 more minutes of basketball and that makes this guy happy.

RE: records thrown out the window - yeah, the first 5 NBL seasons were 40 mins, so it is a poor argument. But I get what you mean.

I think keep the game times as they are. Yeah, a good game can be more fun, but a bad game can go on and on and on. And then you have the eyesore that extra court time for some of the bench bumpkins would cause for the league. I like to keep my Brendan Teyses hidden, thank you very much.

Hated it when it changed, big fan of it now. I think the shorter game is better tactically, and it's less wear and tear for the players over the course of the season. I've been wondering if the NBA might look at it TBH, given the growing concerns with wear and tear over the course of an 82 game season, but a mix of the records/stats and (maybe more importantly) loss of some advertising revenue probably means it won't happen.

44 minutes, done.

I think the 40 minute change brought in more fans by making the game quicker and more exciting. As a pure basketball fan I'd like to see 48 minutes for all the reason previously mentioned, but would it be detrimental to the NBL's growth? I know loads of people who have become Wildcats members because it is a great atmosphere and something fun to do on a Fri night catching up with friends. Would they lose some these ppl if the game moved to 48 minutes and essentially slowed down a little? I'm not sure.

The history argument doesn't work anymore. There have been 16 40-minute seasons now, and there will have been a 17th before this could possibly be implemented. There were only 26 48-minute seasons.

Almost every league in the entire world plays 40-minute games. This debate is absurd.

Anon 863 brought up the time wasting huddles before free-throws. If the huddle happens in the paint, call delay-of-game warning straight away. The opposition wants to huddle? OK, but not in the paint. Simple one that.

Eight more minutes of freethrows.... I just get bored.
Forty minutes would be sufficient, unless sped up.
As PeterJohn et al have written.
One time ago - I played...and we had an option of side ball or freethrow
and the refs didn't have to hold the ball in the back court.
The old days are gone forever..... The game was faster then.
Sideball option, pass or shoot would better than freetrows.
Randle can get a jumper in from sideball.

Camel 31, voting to bring back jump balls too? Yeah! Me too.

Yes, prefer jumpball situation.
Most likely get 1 or 2 a game...

....instead of an arrow, I mean...

Not sure about this idea that the change is away from 48 minutes. There was a change to 48 minutes along the way but basketball was a game of two 20-minute halves long before it was extended to 48 minutes and sub-divided into quarters.

And as someone above astutely noted, the international [real] game remains at the original 40 minutes, though I seem to think that it too is sadly now a game of four quarters.

Camel31

"Sideball option, pass or shoot would better than freetrows.
Randle can get a jumper in from sideball."

I tried that once as a junior. Swished the shot from inbound pass a bit behind free throw line level. It was called as a violation- apparently the ball must touch a player on court before a shot can be attempted. Learnt a new rule that night. Randle could do it quite well, but it'd probably be a violation.

Jump balls need to make a comeback too. And the backcourt violation inbounds not needing to go through the ref.

"Quarter time is the same length it's been since 1996"

From which you can conclude that I have been attending games since before that date. Go figure.

You could also conclude from that that the length of quarter breaks has nothing to do with the length of the quarters, contrary to your earlier assertion.

NBL needs to bring back the 48m game. I know lots of people like the 40m game because it suits families who come and go, but if your a true basketball fan then the 40m game needs to go. People who sit corporate already pay enough.

Since 2009/10, the 40m game was low scoring and the pace of the game slowed down. Wasn't a big fan when the league made these’s major changes.

I much prefer the American style of basketball. Not the European style. FIBA has had a major say because they control our national competitions.

Many records would be broken if they went back. The only issue is the NBL’s tv deals with ESPN and Network 10. The only way 48m game will be back in this league is if the NBA buys the NBL.

Makes sense why Andrew Gaze broke so many points records, it was in 48m era?

This isn't Twitter

@NBL won’t do anything

" but it was good seeing bigger budget teams losing their first elimination game to teams like Cairns who underachieve."

You mean the cairns team with cattalini, mee, Stewart etc that beat arguably a lower budget 36ers?

if your a true basketball fan then the 40m game needs to go.

Since 2009/10, the 40m game was low scoring and the pace of the game slowed down.

I much prefer the American style of basketball. Not the European style. FIBA has had a major say because they control our national competitions.

Yes 48 mins would be sesnisble.

Marginal issue for TV. Much better for bball.

How much longer do 48m games go for. 40m games are 2 hours. Would it roughly be half hour longer or 45m's?

Basketball wise 48m is much better for the game. NBL seasons are short which is a shame. TV deals are the biggest issue.

What was the main reason the NBL switched to 40m game?

I can’t find any old articles when the league made that major announcement. Doesn’t help when it happened in 2009. So many dead-link websites.

Basketball wise 48m is much better for the game.

What was the main reason the NBL switched to 40m game?

Giacontigers,

"What was the main reason the NBL switched to 40m game?"

As I remember, BA, who were in charge of everything basketball then, were trying (desperately) to gain TV deals. Apparently, 40 minute games were more appealing to the networks than 48 min games.

It was made quite clear that the particular TV network (10?) refused basketball a slot longer than 2 hours. Given the amount of advertising which the network wanted to cram in, this forced the NBL into 40-minute games.

The uncertainty of a 48-minute game plus advertising plus possible overtime put too much stress on their scheduling, the network said. Not helped by the last 2 minutes of the game sometimes taking up to 10 in duration.

As for why FIBA and as a result most other leagues went that way, I can only assume that it's for the same reason (or possibly to allow for back-to-back games at fixed times). The NBA can do what they want - they control the conversation with the networks; we don’t.

I contemplated not going to the shortest game of all sport
when we first went from 48, but the 40 kinda accretes.

Hoopie, thanks for those details and confirmation!

It was 20-minute halves until 2000 under FIBA. The NBL played 20-minute halves from 1979 to 1984.

In all seriousness would anyone know when the first branch off from the og 15 minute halves occurred and what said branch off was? (e.g. quarters being 10 or 12, or halves being 20 minutes)

^ I like that response.

More basketball is better for me as well, but if 40 is more tv-friendly then I'll happily give up longer games for a healthier league and games that are more attractive to broadcast partners.

Does anyone know what happened in the past with TV when the game was 48 minutes long?

What was the slot given to the game when it was prime time Channel 7 and 10?

What happened when the game went to quadruple over time?

Did the next show get pushed back or cancelled altogether?

I know the NBL wasn't always 48m's. Was it 20m halfs from 1984 then in 1985 the NBL went to 48m games.

Not sure if I am right or not?

Most NBL on FTA back then aired on Friday and Saturday nights at 8:30pm, on a one hour delay. So the broadcast could be packaged up in a two hour slot. There was no critical programming immediately afterwards to worry about pre-empting in case of OT.

Although in the early 2000s when 7 Perth signed a local deal to air Wildcats games live at 4pm on Saturdays they would cut to the news at 6pm even if the game hadn't ended.

I remember one year the grand final game finished and they cut to the next program without showing the celebrations / awards. haa haa

I know the NBL wasn't always 48m's. Was it 20m halfs from 1984 then in 1985 the NBL went to 48m games.

Not sure if I am right or not?

Although in the early 2000s when 7 Perth signed a local deal to air Wildcats games live at 4pm on Saturdays they would cut to the news at 6pm even if the game hadn't ended.

Thanks koberulz, your really good at coding.

Until our sport is one that networks are lining up for, no. When networks are lining up, maybe.

"If it aint broke, don't fix it!"

10 Peach won't cut it. Can’t see the 48m game coming back anytime soon. Unless there’s heaps of adds, sponsorships maybe?

Annoyed the NBL is sticking to their usual 28 game regular season with top-4.

I know from 1997 to 2003 NBL only had 11 teams. They had the top-6 format through all those’s seasons. I’m still surprised NBL isn’t considering bringing top-6.

Best format is to have the format they used in 2000 season.

Top-2 teams go to the semifinals. Then 3rd plays 6th (best-of-3), 4th plays 5th (best-of-3).

Then maybe have best of 5 for the semifinals and grand final. Would be cool if they could have best of 7 grand final, imagine that.

I preferred the 48 minute games, and in my perfect world I'd like to see them return

But I also don't mind the league making the best decision in regards to telecasts, etc. Ultimately a good tv deal is more important

I agree with you D2!

In reality it won't happen but it would be nice seeing 48 minute game back. 36ers, Taipans game tonight was so low scoring. For me 60-70 point games don’t cut it for me. If that game was had an extra 8 minutes then the scores could of been 80-90 game instead.

I think they should make it 60-minute games. Last night's scores could have been close to 120.

I was hoping for overtime. If the league could have extra 5min quarter for all games be better then doing a 48 minute game.

So instead of better scoring and better offence to get to higher scores we add more time, I get it. It's the same bad offence but you get more points. Lmao.