Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
A5 is player. Why? Because that's what the rules say. It's that simple.
|
How do you know that?
Let's just say that the coach sent 4 players to the table to sub during the timeout...and those 4 were on the floor with all five of the players that were previously playing sitting on the bench. That leaves ONE of the other five that should be a player...but which one? Hmmm. The coach then sends one of them to the table to check in. You're assuming that is the one that that wasn't supposed to come out. Perhaps, the coach is sending a different one back in thinking he's just making yet another substitution. Sure, by your ruling, it doesn't really matter...but it has ramifications on other possible situations (leaving the bench during a fight, earning a T, etc.).
Let's say that a team is down to 5 players when one of them becomes injured. By your rulings, that person remains a player even though they are on the bench since no sub entered in their place (and they weren't DQ'd). Hmmm. As such, that person can come back onto the floor and rejoin play when they're ready since they're still a player and have left for an authorized reason. Is that really what you're proposing.
Further, if they became injured during the timeout, your ruling suggest that the team has earned a T if that player doesn't return simply because they're a player and must return (there is no exception if your interpretation is correct). Hmmm.
Also the rule about failure to return applies not only to timeouts but to intermissions. But, as you've so clearly pointed out above, there are no players during intermission. Hmmm....one rule says there are no players during intermission while another says the players must return after intermission. How can something that doesn't exist return??
You're reading way to much into the rule. I'd go so far as to say that the intent is that all team members are to be bench personnel even during a timeout. A person becomes bench personnel not only through being replaced or DQ'd but by simply being on the bench. Its not spelled out in the rules because it is just basic common sense. If they're on the bench, they're bench personnel.
I'll say it again, the rule about players returning but not returning at the same time.
What if we combine the two situations in your cited case....a timeout with lots of subs....the argument given by the NFHS holds. A player that thought they were subbed out shouldn't be penalized for returning.
EVERY SINGLE CASE/SITUATION you've cited that results in a T has the player returning to the floor during a live ball after the timeout...everyone. The explanations even imply that they're returning deceitfully or in a way that gives the team an advantage. The cases that don't end in a T (after subbing) comment about deceit and advantage....implying that it would be a T in the event the official deems it deceitful or advantageous.
By the letter of the rule, you can certainly read it the way you are...but that doesn't make it right.