View Single Post
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 26, 2012, 11:27am
Adam's Avatar
Adam Adam is offline
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyu2 View Post
No doubt there is an element of contradiction between the two rules; but the interpretation I remember is what I said before: two different situations but one intent not to have a lengthy delay getting a player back into the game or allowing a player to shoot crucial free throws after the end of the 4th qtr./OT
There's already a rule in place to prevent this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad View Post
Because 3-4-6 and 7 both say the situation must be corrected "by the end of the timeout"...not "by the end of however many timeouts the coach calls". Seems pretty clear to me that they get one timeout period to keep the kid in the game...if they want another timeout, we need a sub for the injured/bleeding player first, then they can have the next timeout.
I get the rule, just not the rationale. If time hasn't expired for the 4th Q or OT, why does it matter? If the coach wants to burn 5 TOs, why shouldn't he be allowed to do so?
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote