0 and 00
 

Clemson just given administrative T for having 0 in the book but player wearing 00.

Announcer stated that a team can have both 0 and 00 playing but 0 must be 0 in the book and 00 must be 00.

Interesting that NFHS does not allow that: "A team member list shall not have both numbers 0 and 00." (3-4-3d)

Is NCAA-M different? Or was the announcer wrong?

From the NCAAM rules book:

2�
The following numbers are legal: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 00, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 40,
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55� Team rosters can
include 0 or 00, but not both�

The announcer is incorrect. The rule is the same as for NFHS.

I gave this exact same technical foul about seven years ago. Kid was wearing 00, but was listed as 0. Those are different numbers/symbols used to identify players, just as 33 is not the same as 3.

Why did you put this statement in the form of a question? This isn't Jeopardy. ;)

I'd chalk it up as a transcription error.

Since 0 and 00 can't play at the same time, where's the confusion?

I think I'll start verifying it's correct whenever I see 0 or 00 in the book and save the headache.

It doesn't matter what's in the book, only what is on the roster that the team submitted to the official scorer.

Doesn't preclude me from verifying it's correctly input so I don't have to deal with it later. I prefer dealing with any book issues before the game, not during the game.

So is it an administrative tech or a direct to the coach for an illegal uniform? What if both numbers are present can the coach avoid the tech by not playing one of them?

The relevant rule then is 10-6-4: "The head coach shall not permit a tam member to participate while wearing an illegal uniform (see 3-4)".

Does that answer the above question? Or is there some other casebook or interpretation that steers us in a different direction?

What part of the uniform was illegal? 0 is a legal number. Your cite would be relevant if the player was wearing 88, for example.

The relevant cite is "changing a number in the scorebook to match what the player is wearing." (or whatever the specific wording is)

Would we consider one of the jerseys illegal if there were players wearing 0 & 00?

Thanx Bob!

The rule says the team member LIST shall not contain 0 and 00. So i would say we are removing the number from the list in the book and go administrative as opposed to a direct T for illegal uniform. have to think more about it.

I know this has been discussed on here before and it all came back to a NFHS interpretation that is posted on this website from the year 2008. It seems to indicate that they could play at the same time and the penalty would be for illegal uniform. At least, in NFHS.

1999-2000 NFHS Interpretation:
SITUATION 11: Ten minutes before the scheduled starting time of the game, the Referee checks the scorebook for Team B and finds starters checked included player’s identified by number as 2, 35, 00, 31 and 0.
RULING: A technical foul is assessed Team B for having 00 and 0 in the book. While 0 and 00 are legal numbers, a team may not have both 0 and 00 on the team roster. Either player No. 00 or player No. 0 will be required to change jersey numbers prior to being eligible for participation. (3-4-3, 10-1-2)

2008-2009 NFHS Interpretation:
SITUATION 2: A team has members with No. 0 and No. 00 listed in the scorebook and it is discovered (a) with 14 minutes on the clock prior to the game, (b) with 8 minutes on the clock prior to the game or (c) after the game starts. RULING: In (a), changes can be made without penalty. In (b), if a number is changed in the scorebook, a team technical is charged. The offended team is awarded two free throws and a throw-in at the division line to begin the game. The arrow is toward the offending team. If no changes are made to the scorebook, no infraction has occurred. In (c), after the game starts, there is no infraction if only one of the team members (No. 0 or No. 00) participates. If the second team member wishes to participate, the result is an illegal number when "discovered." The penalty is a direct technical foul on the head coach for an illegal uniform. Two free throws and a division line throw-in for the offended team and loss of coaching box privileges for the offending coach. The second team member (with the illegal uniform number) may participate without further penalty and is NOT required to change his/her number. Another possibility exists after the game starts when one of the team members wants to change his/her number prior to participating. The result is a team technical foul (no loss of coaching box) for changing the scorebook. COMMENT: No team should have both No. 0 and No. 00 on its regular roster. The infraction is likely due to bringing a player up or down a level. Therefore, it is possible the team has access to other legal uniforms to replace a uniform with an illegal number. (3-4-3d; 10-1-2; 10-5-4)

Personally, this rule seems unnecessarily silly. An official can signal 00 or he can signal 0. No difference. we allow 33 and 3, don't we.

(And yes ... I believe 05 and 5 should be legal for the very same reason)

If they really have an issue with this, make 0 or 00 (or both) not legal.

Easy Peasey Lemon Squeezy ...
 

Logical. Rational. Simple. Let's do it.

I've always had the same thought.

That said, most rules that seem silly evolve from some incident in the past that gave rise to their origin.* I'd be interested if there is such a history with this rule.

* Good example: Some NCAA D1 title game several years back started with a held ball before the AP procedure had been established. So the two players involved then jumped. Apparently people took issue with this, feeling that the two centers should be allowed to jump again. The very next year, the rule was changed to allow this. Had this not happened in a D1 tourney game, I doubt anyone would ever have given two poops about it.

The history is that both numbers used to be allowed. Then, when they started going to "computerized" stats programs, the computers couldn't distinguish between the two, so only one was allowed.

The difference here is that 0 (or 5) has the same value as 00 (or 05), just with a meaningless zero added at the start. 3 does not have the same value as 33.

Because of the way computers work, there is no way for them to distinguish between 0 and 00, or 5 and 05, in some cases.

I'm of the firm belief that there should not be a T if there's a feasible case of computer error. I stress I'm not an official in any sport, but the last thing I want to see is a "technicality technical", if you know what I mean.

Of course there are. May not be as easy, but . . .

05 isn't a number. Never has been.

Now I know why you proctored my math competency exams in 1993.

Computer programmer checking in:

05 and 5 (or 0 and 00) are equivalent only if the uniform number is stored as an Integer. If they're stored as a String, 05 and 5 are not identical.

About the only real reason you'd store uniform number as an Integer is to make sorting easier... sorting Integers in numerical order (as you would expect in a box score) is easier than sorting Strings in numerical order... with Strings, the default order will be something like this:
0
00
02
03
1
01
12
14
2
22
25
3
31
32
34
etc.

Two math degrees later....and I'm a marketing executive. :)

But you have me curious now since I did do that as a work study job in 1993. Apparently we went to school together?

And the sorting is why I assumed they store the digits as integers. Could be wrong. Always hated programming.

Well, I sure didn't travel from that (way) bigger school that it north on 26 (I happen to be there now - actually using math from time to time!).

BTW, the new science center is very nice (but I think the math department is still in the other science center). The football field is now turf, and they are building a facility by the kiln for soccer, field hockey and tennis.

Good Timing
 

10+ years of officiating and I never came across this situation in a high school game...until tonight, just days after I read these interpretations. I was the R and addressed with Coach B. Of course, he said, "we've played 6 games and nobody has said anything." To which I replied, "someone isn't doing their job." He took it in stride and decided to not play #0 to avoid the T.

Thanks for the post, Freddy! :)