4 players on the court

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

NO.
A team has FIVE players. Those are the ones who are legally in the game at any time, except for during intermissions when all team members are bench personnel and there are no players. (4-34-1&2)

Although, following an intermission (or a time-out) the same five players are to start the next quarter, unless a substitution takes place during the intermission (or time-out). (3-3-1a)

Lastly, we know that a player only becomes bench personnel after his substitute becomes a player. (4-34-3)

Therefore, according to those rules, the team still has five players. The problem is simply that only four of them are on the floor and one of them is on the bench--not where he is supposed to be. Per the two Case Book plays, the NFHS rules allow that fifth player to return to the playing floor without penalty, unless the situation follows a time-out or intermission or if he does so in a manner which deceives the opponents.

And I agree with all of this. (Not that there is anything to agree with, these are just rules.)

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That fifth player is the only one who is permitted this. Why? Because he has not been substituted and is actually still legally in the game. Other team members would have to properly substitute into the game. Don't forget that substitutes must both report to the scorer and be beckoned in by an official or it is a technical foul (10-3-1&2).

That is the rules process, but the problem in practice would be knowing who that fifth player actually is.

In theory, Ok, but again, once the ball becomes live, that substitute now becomes a player, and I believe this may be too late to penalize. If one of the designated starters does not start a game, and it is realized 10 seconds after the opening tip, it is too late to penalize, therefore one would reasonably assume that this is too late to penalize as well.

And once again I agree, and because of the difficulty in knowing who that 5th player is, I think this would be rarely penalized.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by frezer11

In theory, Ok, but again, once the ball becomes live, that substitute now becomes a player, and I believe this may be too late to penalize. If one of the designated starters does not start a game, and it is realized 10 seconds after the opening tip, it is too late to penalize, therefore one would reasonably assume that this is too late to penalize as well.

Starting the game is not a substitution situation. It is an improper change of designated starters. You are correct that in that case it would be too late to penalize as the dead ball was made live to start the game.

A team member running off the bench and onto the court during play is different because he is violating the substitution rules and can still be held accountable for those.

This isn't hockey.

[BigT]

My feeling is...

Always count.

If you dont and 5 comes on and gains an advantage its a T.
If he comes on and doesnt gain an advantage play on and I tell the coach it was my fault we started without the player.

Thats what common sense tells me.. and it feels simple to remember..

Not that I would ever let it happen.. I am too OCD for that.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by BigT

My feeling is...

Always count.

If you dont and 5 comes on and gains an advantage its a T.
If he comes on and doesnt gain an advantage play on and I tell the coach it was my fault we started without the player.

Thats what common sense tells me.. and it feels simple to remember..

Not that I would ever let it happen.. I am too OCD for that.

And at least for me, this whole conversation is pretty much a hypothetical, because you're right, you should always count to be sure.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by frezer11

And at least for me, this whole conversation is pretty much a hypothetical, because you're right, you should always count to be sure.

The situation setup in the case play isn't one in which you can count. It is one in which the team doesn't come out of the timeout and you put the ball in play. In such a case, you have nothing to count until after the ball is in play.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The situation setup in the case play isn't one in which you can count. It is one in which the team doesn't come out of the timeout and you put the ball in play. In such a case, you have nothing to count until after the ball is in play.

Touche. I meant the lengthy substitution case, but I forgot that there are two cases being discussed in this thread.

[FeetBallRef]

With respect to using 10.1.9, that is a case where the Coach is holding the team causing a delay of game situation. Another rule to consider is SECTION 5 RESUMPTION-OF-PLAY PROCEDURE, THROW-INS
ART. 1 . . . When a team does not make a thrower available, after a time-out (as in 7-4-4) or the
intermission between any quarter (as in 6-2-3), the resumption-of-play procedure is used to
prevent delay. The administering official will sound the whistle to indicate play will resume. In
each situation:
a. The ball shall be put in play if Team A is ready or it shall be placed on the floor.
b. The throw-in count shall begin and if a violation occurs, the procedure will be repeated
for Team B.
c. Following a violation by one team only, if that team continues to delay when authorized to
make a throw-in, it is a technical foul.
d. Following a violation by both teams, any further delay by either team is a technical foul.

Effectively this negates how 10.1.9 is to be administered.

IMHO, the delay return of a player (who is not deceiving) is a human mistake that shouldn't be penalized. Think about it, Coach has sent A6 to report to sub for A1 and then calls a TO. During the TO, Coach tells A6 not to go in but A1 didn't understand that they were to return. Why is a T needed for no advantage gained especially if Rule 7.5 lets us play without 5 players and it is not a T.