[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The names are there for the opposing team's preparation. The coaches instruct the players who they will guarding. If the roster said the starters were John, Dave, etc. but Brad, Chuck, etc. stepped on the floor wearing the numbers listed as starters, that would be wrong, unfair, and not in the spirit of the game. The purpose of providing the names is for the opposing coach to know who is actually starting. They don't make defensive assignments on numbers but on players.

As someone who has coached and officiated in 3 states and worked in sports media in different capacities I would say the above is not at all accurate in my experience.

The names in the book are primarily for stat keeping and the media, not coaches' preparation. I coached against several future NBA players as a HS assistant. When watching tape and instructing players on how to guard/attack certain players we always said #32 likes to do this, not Jeff Green does this.

Coaches go by numbers not names, especially when if its not a star player or a local rivalry and they are unlikely to even know most of the kid's names. And coaches are especially not going by the name in the book 10 minutes before they play to rely on preparation. What if #32 and #23 decide to switch numbers before the game and are both entered into the book correctly?

Short of an ejection, injury, or some issue for a sanctioning body to worry about that carries over to the next game the name in the book is not really a concern to me as an official.

Originally Posted by jeremy341a

What if the reasoning for the wrong name was this?

Book reads
Jim Smith #5
Dan Jones #15

Real Info
Jim Smith #15
Dan Jones #5

So now we issue a T for changing numbers bc we don't have the right number listed with the right player correct or is this also a book keeper error? What if it is bc the kids switched jerseys without telling their coach?

If it was a mistake and the names were just entered wrong, I'm calling it a book keeping error and moving on.

What matters to me is that for the purposes of calling fouls, #32 on the floor is #32 in the book.

What I think matters is how the mistake is discovered. Is the home book or a coach saying #32 is not Johnny? Is the visiting book pointing out their own error and correcting it?

Again, short of some sort of intentional deception or trying to circumvent a rule/punishment I'm not issuing a T b/c I don't think the situation warrants it and I have support from my commissioner to use my judgment.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Good example. You can't decide to switch names to avoid the T vs switching the numbers.

See above. I can and will if I think it was simply a mistake in writing the names.

Originally Posted by jeremy341a

That works for me. Wouldn't the roster be what they presented to the actually book keeper and not what was a game or two before? If the visiting book keeper filled out that nights wrong then that is what is presented to the home book keeper than the roster was incorrect. However if they presented the previous games info to the home scorekeeper than they copied that wrong I would see that as a book keeping error.

To be clear, in the example I gave a T should have been awarded by rule. A book keeping error is limited to the official scorer. If the info supplied is wrong and requires the number to be changed a T is warranted. I/We decided to bend the rules and extend the book keeping error to the V book who had the number incorrect on their roster and in the book. They said they had 2 rosters and used the wrong one.

What I'm arguing is that there is more latitude with a name change as my reading of the rule does not require a T.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes, that's a T. Specifically in the rule or a case.

Do you have a reference?