Illegal substitution?

[Rich]

My argument is that beckoning a substitute in after a timeout is granted is improper.

There's a procedure for substitutes to report and enter a game during a timeout -- beckoning them is not part of the process.

It's different if I beckon in a sub and the sub enters the court and THEN a team requests and is granted a timeout. The OP doesn't make any such distinction, so I've operated under the assumption that A requested a timeout, the official granted it, and the sub was still sitting at the X.

[johnsonboys03]

Originally Posted by Rich

My argument is that beckoning a substitute in after a timeout is granted is improper.

There's a procedure for substitutes to report and enter a game during a timeout -- beckoning them is not part of the process.

It's different if I beckon in a sub and the sub enters the court and THEN a team requests and is granted a timeout. The OP doesn't make any such distinction, so I've operated under the assumption that A requested a timeout, the official granted it, and the sub was still sitting at the X.

Your assumption is correct. If this is the correct ruling than that is the way I will handle it and advise others to do it as well. I was just looking for it to be spelled out. I know some will say it is and I'm just not understanding it. Its just while doing my due diliegence I discovered the ruling in situation 3.3.1 F. I hope someone can at least acknowledge I have at least a reason to ask.