Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
This case deals with a lengthy substitution process, as opposed to a timeout.
Wouldn't the principle be the same? It would seem so, but it is addressed differently in two different rules. 10-1-9 & 10-3-2
|
Thanks. I see the difference. By the casebook's ruling was: "no technical foul is charged to A5. A5's return to the court was not deceitful, nor did it provide A5 an unfair positioning advantage on the court."
Whether its dead ball mass substitution or during a timeout, both seem to me to "not be deceitful".