Quote:
Originally Posted by stiffler3492
I understand "the intent of the rule" argument.
While this situation will probably never happen to any of us, it's certainly fostered some good discussion.
What I keep getting hung up on, though, is the resumption of play. We've theorized getting a sub, putting the ball down and starting to count, etc.
While this exact situation is not necessarily covered in the rules/cases, I'm still inclined to use the "leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason" reference to give a T. That way, we're at least following the rules to some extent.
I don't have my books in front of me, but I suppose what could follow, if the kid won't come back on the floor, is a DOG warning? I don't know, I'm just trying to come up with a logical way to continue the game.
|
And these discussions are wonderful. It gets us to think about what we would do and when it does happen we have some idea of what our thinking will be.
With all that being said, I cannot think of a single assignor I work for that would not be OK with me or any other official not calling a T for the "leaving the court" portion of the rule. As I said before, I can already realistically see a T for removing the jersey depending on when it took place. But to compound that with a T or any other very suspect penalty, I cannot see me using not using common sense. And I am also comfortable that my experience would be respected as well if I choose not to do so. And until the NF puts out a ruling or the IHSA puts out a ruling suggesting otherwise, I will not penalize such an action for a kid that is quitting the team even in a spectacular way.
Peace