View Single Post
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 22, 2000, 02:23am
Indy_Ref Indy_Ref is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Greater Indianapolis Area
Posts: 436
Send a message via Yahoo to Indy_Ref
Cool Re: Am I missing something here?

Quote:
Originally posted by BktBallRef


Why? Why did you tell them to remain at the table? There's no reason that B6 & B7 can't enter the game. That was the purpose of the rule change. You should beckon the subs into the game. They do not have to wait until the coach replaces the disqualified player with a sub. In fact, any player from either team should be allowed into the game up until the sub for the disqualified player is beckoned.

I have to agree with Bob. You created some problems for yourself that could have been avoided. But, we all live and learn.
I love it how everyone has to get their own barb in before we let the issue rest...

BktBallRef, I have already admitted "bone-headedness"...you don't have to point out more! My intent was to make it easier on everyone to enter. I wanted to make sure we didn't end up with 6 on the floor...which is what actually happened! Why didn't I beckon them in? Because I was busy telling the coach that B1 had committed his 5th foul, he needed a replacement for him, and telling the time keeper that I needed a 30-second count started. That's why!

Next time, should I go ahead and beckon B6 & B7 onto the court and then take care of fouled out B1, coach, and timer? Then we'll have people running all over the place not knowing who's coming in for who since player B1 just fouled out. What I believe is likely in that scenario is that B1, B2, and B3 will all go to the bench when, in fact, only B2 or B3 should go to the bench. If B2 & B3 do return to the bench, in theory, they should not be allowed to return to the game until after the first dead ball after the clock starts or if team B takes a TO (and I'm sure that will make the coach real happy.) Agree? I think by making them stay, if I'd have understood the rule correctly and fully, I believe I would (or could) have saved everyone a headache.

I do NOT believe my error was in keeping B6 & B7 at the table. Rather, I believe my error was NOT knowing that a previously reported player, reporting in for a particular player on the court, could be changed by the coach whenever said coach wanted BEFORE I beckoned the player onto the court. If coach B would have told me, "I will have B6 replace B1 instead of having B6 replace B2. Plus, I still want B7 to replace B3 while I now leave B2 in the game (or vice versa)." Everything would have come out how I had intended in the beginning of the whole mess.

I clearly know what my mistake was, and I'll NEVER commit it again!

Thanks everyone!

[Edited by Indy_Ref on Dec 22nd, 2000 at 01:25 AM]
Reply With Quote