Quote:
Originally Posted by justacoach
There is a seeming disparity between the case book and rules book as to what happens if official beckons coach to atttend to injured player.
Rules book says explicitly:
Rule 3 article 6
ART. 6 . . . A player who has been injured to the extent that the coach or any
other bench personnel is beckoned and/or comes onto the court shall be directed to leave the game, unless a time-out is requested by, and granted to, his/her team
and the situation can be corrected by the end of the time-out.
Case book states:
3.3.6 SITUATION B: A1 appears to be injured and an official properly halts play
and the Team A coach rushes onto the court to check A1. However, A1 is OK and
seems ready to play within a few seconds. RULING: A1 must be removed as the
coach came onto the court. A1 may remain in the game if the coach does not
come on the court and A1 is ready to play immediately. If the coach or other
bench personnel have come onto the court, the player must be replaced. There is
no set amount of time as to what is “immed iately,” but it should not involve more
than a few seconds and it must be without the coach, trainer or doctor being
beckoned and/or entering the court. The coach may also call a time-out to keep
the player in the game. (10-4-2)
How to reconcile these two citations if coach ignores my request to attend to injured player?
Does it hinge on whether the player is 'immediately' ready to resume playing?
Appreciate your insights here, got a 6 pack riding on it
|
How don't understand what disparity you see. The rule and case play are clear to me
If you beckon the coach, the player must be removed or the coach must use a TO to keep him in the game.
If the coaches enters without being beckoned, he must replace him.
What are you seeing differently?