Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Goodwin
Billy: did the CIAC happen to address what happens when a team only has five eligible players when a player TF is called? Will they play 4 vs. 5 until the clock properly runs?
Side note: this is similar to HS soccer, in that a player receiving a yellow card is instructed to leave the field until that team's next legal opportunity to substitute.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
While not addressing this issue specifically, the CIAC modeled this policy after NFHS rule 3-3-4, which states in part that “… a player directed to leave the game shall not re-enter before the next opportunity to substitute after the clock has started properly following the player’s replacement”. This leads me to believe that the CIAC would use any other relevant NFHS interpretations in regard to this rule.
Regarding the necessity of playing with five players if a team has five players eligible, it is my understanding that in cases where the fifth participant is on the bench waiting to "sit a tick" (and thus ineligible at the time) the "must have five players participating as long as it has that number available" rule overrides the "must not reenter before the next opportunity to substitute after the clock has been started properly following his replacement" rule. i.e. "must sit a tick".
Casebook Play 8.2 SITUATION B: A1 is fouled and will be shooting two free throws. After A1’s first free-throw attempt, B6 (Team B’s only remaining eligible substitute) replaces B2. A1’s second free-throw attempt is unsuccessful. During rebounding action for A1’s missed second free-throw attempt, and before the clock starts, A1 pushes B3 in the back causing B3 to roll an ankle. Team B is in the bonus. B3 is unable to immediately continue playing. Team B requests and is granted a time out in order to allow B3 to recover from the ankle injury so as to remain in the game. B3 is still not able to play after the time out has ended. RULING: B2 may return to the game and replace B3 and shoot B3’s free throw attempts despite having been replaced since he/she is the only available substitute. (3-3-4)
A former interpreter of ours simply stated it as, "Five trumps sit a tick."
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Billy:
You forgot to cite the author of CB Play 8.2B's RULING, 😉. This Case Book Play has been in the NFHS Case Book since 2008-09.
MTD, Sr.
|
For those who do not know: I have a deep dark officiating secret. I officiating boys'/girls' H.S. soccer from 1993 to 2005. Oh the shame of officiating the un-American sport, 🤣!
The reasoning behind the Rule was to give the Player's HC a chance to have his/her Player "cool down" but more often than not the Player's HC would not have his/her Player even come to the Team Bench, instead, having his/her Player remain at the Scorer/Timer Table to re-enter the game at the Team's next opportunity to substitute, which in many cases was ten seconds or less from the time the Player received his/her
Yellow Card. I remember, very well, I
Yellow Carded a Player who remained out of the game for less ten seconds only to come back and immediately go after his opponent again and do the exact same thing for his second
Yellow Card which became and immediate
Yellow/
Red Card ejection, so much for a HC doing his job.
Mike:
Do you find that to be the case with some HCs not embracing the reasoning behind the Soccer Rule?
MTD, Sr.
Billy:
While my CB Play 8.2 Sit. B is an extremely rare situation, I also believe that the CIAC Player TF Rule creating such a situation such as in CB Play 8.2 Sit. B will be an every rarer situation. The real problem will be if Basketball HCs will be the same as some Soccer HCs and not embrace the reasoning behind the Rule.
Has the CIAC State Rules Interpreter or the IAABO Connecticut State Rules Interpreter officially ruled on this Situation?
How well do you know Dave Grossman, the Director of Officials for the CIAC Girls' Tournament? He and I back 30 years.
MTD, Sr.