4 players on the court

[Ump K]

Situation;
After a time out due to some mis-understanding Team "A" has only 4 players playing. Referees didn't detect this and the ball is in play. When the referees detect that team "A" has 4 players on the court during play, what should they do? This has been posted on our organization facebook page and hasn't been resolved. Some say to call a "T" on Team "A" immediately (NFHS rule 10.1.9). One of our state clinicians/rules interpreter says don't call a "T", "play-on". What would you do?

[deecee]

I would only asses a T if I thought they were trying to be tricky or deceiving. 99% of the time I'm not T'ing them, nor am I T'ing them for when the 5th player runs on the court. Then again I haven't dealt with this type of issue since the last time it happened 10 years ago and I felt so stupid for such a mistake I make it a priority to NEVER let this happen and put me in an awkward position.

[BillyMac]

10.3.2 SITUATION B: After a lengthy substitution process involving multiple
substitutions for both Team A and Team B, A5 goes to the bench and remains
there, mistakenly believing he/she has been replaced. The ball is put in play even
though Team A has only four players on the court. Team A is bringing the ball into
A’s frontcourt when the coach of Team A realizes they have only four players. The
coach yells for A5 to return and he/she sprints directly onto the court and catches
up with the play. RULING: No technical foul is charged to A5. A5’s return to
the court was not deceitful, nor did it provide A5 an unfair positioning advantage
on the court.

10.1.9 SITUATION: Following a charged time-out Team B is still with their
coach on the sideline when the official sounds the whistle to indicate play will
resume. Four players of B return to the court just in time to play defense as A1
attempts an unsuccessful three-pointer. B1 rebounds and throws a long pass to
B5 who enters the court just in time to catch the pass. RULING: A technical foul
is immed iately charged to Team B for failing to have all players return to the court
at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission. While it is
true the entire team may be off the court while the procedure is being used, once
a team responds, all players must enter the court at approximately the same time.

[Nevadaref]

Since the situation occurred following a time-out a technical foul is warranted despite a little bit of game action taking place before the infraction was noticed.
It would be nice if your state clinician could read the NFHS Case Book.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since the situation occurred following a time-out a technical foul is warranted despite a little bit of game action taking place before the infraction was noticed.
It would be nice if your state clinician could read the NFHS Case Book.

State clinician was right. You play on until the player returns or there is a whistle to create an opportunity for the player to return.

According the case, the T occurs when the absent player actually returns during the live ball. It is not for not returning. If that were not the case, the case play wouldn't need to include the element where the 5th player returns before the T is called. The T is called when the 5th player returns.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

State clinician was right. You play on until the player returns or there is a whistle to create an opportunity for the player to return.

According the case, the T occurs when the absent player actually returns during the live ball. It is not for not returning. If that were not the case, the case play wouldn't need to include the element where the 5th player returns before the T is called. The T is called when the 5th player returns.

You are reading more into the Case play. Look at the plain text of the rule. 10-2-5: "Fail to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission." The team certainly didn't have ALL players come out. That's a penalty right there. The case play is merely an example of that occurring. I read it as the officials noticed the problem when the fifth came off the bench to catch the long pass. The officials need to notice it before they can penalize it. You don't just play on knowing that there is a problem.

[BryanV21]

Are we ignoring the first case play BillyMac posted? The one where you DON'T give a technical foul?

The two case plays he posted make it sound like you only give a technical if the player's return was deceitful or gave the team some sort of advantage.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Are we ignoring the first case play BillyMac posted? The one where you DON'T give a technical foul?

The two case plays he posted make it sound like you only give a technical if the player's return was deceitful or gave the team some sort of advantage.

No, I'm advocating using the one which applies to the situation at hand.
One Case play reads, "After a lengthy substitution process..." while the other begins "Following a time-out..."

Now which situation did the OP present?

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

No, I'm advocating using the one which applies to the situation at hand.
One Case play reads, "After a lengthy substitution process..." while the other begins "Following a time-out..."

Now which situation did the OP present?

And in the OP the 5th player did not give her team any sort of advantage by running in to catch a long pass after a rebound. In fact, in the OP, the 5th player never even returned to play. I don't understand how you can say the second case play fits the OP, but not the first. I mean, there are implications in both.

The case plays, and pretty much all rules, seem to be about a team gaining an unfair advantage. If no advantage is gained I don't see the point of the technical foul. You're penalizing a team for being at a disadvantage (which, yes, was there fault).

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I agree with Nevada on this (the third time in less than a month we have taken the same position).

BUT! I do believe that Camron, Nevada, and Billy will agree with me on this point: The game officials should not ever let the game resume with either or both teams having five players on the court. That is Basketball Officiating 101. Count the players and them count them again even if it means taking your shoes and socks off to count the players.

MTD, Sr.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I agree with Nevada on this (the third time in less than a month we have taken the same position).

BUT! I do believe that Camron, Nevada, and Billy will agree with me on this point: The game officials should not ever let the game with either or both teams having five players on the courticaria. That is Basketball Officiating 101. Count the players and them count them again even if it means taking your shoes and socks off to count the players.

MTD, Sr.

I don't mean to say anybody is wrong. I just want to make sure I do the right thing, and it feels wrong to give a team a technical foul when they put themselves at a disadvantage by having only four players on the court.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The game officials should not ever let the game resume with either or both teams having five players on the court. That is Basketball Officiating 101. Count the players and them count them again even if it means taking your shoes and socks off to count the players.

Hey -- S*** happens. Otherwise there wouldn't be a need for it in the book.

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I don't mean to say anybody is wrong. I just want to make sure I do the right thing, and it feels wrong to give a team a technical foul when they put themselves at a disadvantage by having only four players on the court.

I have long thought that the rule should be "play with 6 -- immediate T. Play with 4 -- keep playing until the next opportunity to substitute."

I might even allow a "special substitution" period immediately after the other team scores.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I might even allow a "special substitution" period immediately after the other team scores.

How about like a line change in hockey? Substitution with a live ball and running clock. We sometimes allow this with a running clock in Special Olympics Unified Games. With several games scheduled in a short period of time at a site, it saves some time.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You are reading more into the Case play. Look at the plain text of the rule. 10-2-5: "Fail to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission." The team certainly didn't have ALL players come out. That's a penalty right there. The case play is merely an example of that occurring. I read it as the officials noticed the problem when the fifth came off the bench to catch the long pass. The officials need to notice it before they can penalize it. You don't just play on knowing that there is a problem.

No. The case play is penalizing them for returning at DIFFERENT times....note that the penalty didn't come until that player came back. That is what the penalty is for....the late return. If the last player doesn't return, there is no penalty. They have to play without said player until the next stoppage of play.

If it were otherwise, it would be much simpler to say that playing with other than 5 players would be a T if 5 were available. They do say that for 6 players. If they wanted that to be the case for 4, it would have been much easier to say it that way.

All that returned in the OP did so at the same time...thus no penalty.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No. The case play is penalizing them for returning at DIFFERENT times....note that the penalty didn't come until that player came back. That is what the penalty is for....the late return. If the last player doesn't return, there is no penalty. They have to play without said player until the next stoppage of play.

If it were otherwise, it would be much simpler to say that playing with other than 5 players would be a T if 5 were available. They do say that for 6 players. If they wanted that to be the case for 4, it would have been much easier to say it that way.

All that returned in the OP did so at the same time...thus no penalty.

We are going to have to disagree.
The rule doesn't say what you are writing. It clearly says that it is a technical foul to "fail to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time." If one guy stays on the bench, then the team has failed to have all players return right at that very moment.
There is no provision requiring the remaining player to return at all in order to invoke a penalty. That just may be when the officials notice the problem.

Look at the language of the ruling in Case Play 10.1.9: "RULING: A technical foul is immediately charged to Team B for failing to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission."

The rules book also says that this is to be penalized when it occurs.

Lastly, your "all that returned...did so at the same time" doesn't hold water. ALL means ALL, not some. C'mon man!