[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

While I am late in joining the discussion I have been following it. That said, ...

When the NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Committees adopted the Timing Period Rule a couple of decades ago I can say with great certainty (without climbing into the attic to go through file boxes) that the protocol for the Situation being discussed was: Beckon A6 and A7 with B6 but not until after B6 had reported to the Scorer. The Rationale was that nothing can happen until B6 has Reported to the Scorer.

The most important thing is:* When a Player for whom a Substitute is required:* a) Disqualified: b) Injured/Sick; c) Uniform Infraction/Jewelry; or d) Blood, the HC has a defined Time Period in which to have a Substitute report to the Scorer and per Rule, nothing else can happen until the Substitute has Reported to the Scorer.* And that Protocol has been in place*for as long as when the Rule was adopted that put a Time Period for Replacing the Player with a Substitute.

I would then beckon B6 into the Game followed by quickly beckoning A6 and A7 into the Game, but in actuality, I was beckoning all of them (B6, A6, and A7) into the Game at the same time.

The discussion really is about semantics. Yes, the Rule could be better worded but no rule is being broken by waiting until B6 has reported to the Scorer and then all of the Substitutes are brought into the game at the same time.

MTD, Sr.