| bob jenkins |
Thu Oct 02, 2003 04:18pm |
Quote:
Originally posted by A Pennsylvania Coach
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Call me crazy (because I am crazy), but why wouldn't we have an indirect technical charged to the coach?
3-3-3: A player (A5) becomes bench personnel after his/her substitute (A6) becomes a player (i.e., when the ball next becomes live). A6 was a player when the ball was next inbounded and A5 was bench personnel - he gets T'd, I'm giving the coach an indirect.
|
But how does anyone besides the coach know that A6 was put into the game for A5, as opposed to A1, A2, A3, or A4? Substitutes aren't required to report who they are subbing for.
|
There's a specific case in last years interp(?) regarding three players who enter (legally) and a fight breaks out before the replaced players can leave the floor.
Ruling: The officials should try to determine who was being replaced. Failing that, they should assess the maximum penalty -- those who fought were being replaced (so it's an indirect on the coach).
I'd apply the same ruling here (at least if I'm reading the play right).
|
