Photo: VCG

The opening of the 2025-26 season of China's top-tier basketball league Chinese Basketball Association (CBA) has led to an unexpected focus and the most talked-about rule change in years: the addition of an extra "potential game" after regulation play, widely dubbed the "fifth quarter." 

On paper, the reform is a direct response to long-standing concerns about the lack of court time for domestic young players in the CBA league, which is often dominated by veterans and foreign imports. But the reality on the court during the season's first round has revealed a gap between aspiration and execution of this experimental "fifth quarter." 

The idea behind the potential game is straightforward: After the regulation four quarters, now shortened to 10 minutes each to align with FIBA (International Basketball Federation) standards, teams stay on the court for a 10-minute segment exclusively for non-starting domestic players. 

It's meant to be a structured, competitive arena where youngsters can handle the ball, make decisions, and build confidence in real game conditions they rarely see during a regular CBA match. This reflects a growing recognition within the league that talent development cannot be left to chance. 

Yet the very first games have exposed a blind spot in the original design. Because the rule as written only stipulates that potential game participants be domestic and non-starters, some clubs interpreted it as an opportunity to give extra minutes to seasoned veterans who don't start, effectively turning the segment into a veteran showcase rather than a developmental proving ground. 

Players with years of CBA experience under their belts have seen extended runs in these segments, diluting the space that was supposed to belong to emerging prospects. This literal interpretation of "non-starter" has drawn criticism from media and fans alike, who quip that the league has inadvertently created a sort of old-boys' relaxing quarter instead of a youth incubator. 

This mismatch between intent and impact does not mean the experiment has failed. On the contrary, it demonstrates something vital: Rules matter as much as goals. Thoughtful reform cannot stop at broad ideals; it needs precision in order to align incentives with outcomes. The current complaints aren't about rejecting youth development, but about ensuring that the new structure actually serves young players rather than offering another platform for comfortable veterans to extend court time. 

The switch to 10-minute quarters and other rule changes reflect a systemic effort to harmonize the domestic competition with international standards and, by extension, improve the competitive readiness of Chinese players at the global level. That signal is important: The governing body acknowledges that player readiness and exposure are not peripheral concerns but central to the future of the sport in the country. 

To stay true to its developmental promise, the "fifth quarter" will need clearer guardrails around eligibility and perhaps age thresholds or minute caps that genuinely privilege youth participation. The league might also consider incentives for teams that prioritize young talent in these segments, helping ensure that the developmental value of the time is reflected in how clubs allocate it.

The fact that the reform has triggered vigorous public debate, rather than indifference, speaks to the seriousness with which fans, media, and practitioners view the future of Chinese basketball. The "fifth quarter," even in its imperfect initial iteration, has spotlighted a previously muted theme in CBA discourse that cultivating domestic talent must be engineered into the very architecture of competition. 

If the league can leverage this moment of friction into a process of refinement rather than retreat, the "fifth quarter" could become more than a novelty; it could become a reliable step toward a deeper, more competitive, and more sustainable system in Chinese basketball.

The author is a reporter with the Global Times. life@globaltimes.com.cn