6 on the Court -- unnoticed...

[bucky]

I must have missed something obvious but why any focus on the clock running? Also, why can the table not be used for any assistance? That is in the rule book. Plus, if the table does recognize it during a live ball, they may hit the horn a few times, and then the ref blows his whistle making the ball dead. In that case, where it was discovered during a live ball, it becomes irrelevant because the ref blew his whistle making the ball dead? That seems illogical.

And not everything is covered by the rules, thus "The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

And not everything is covered by the rules, thus "The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

... and "it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may
be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be
permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be
permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not
intended by a rule."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

... why any focus on the clock running?

Because it highlights my opinion versus the opinion of a few other Forum members. There are few instances where the clock is running and the ball is dead. I opine that officials can penalize for more than five in these situations because I believe that said team members are "participating" (the key to the rule), while others say officials can't.

We can all agree that we can penalize during live balls, even if the clock isn't running, no need for discussion on that. Team members are always participating under those circumstances

Dead ball with clock stopped? Even I agree that it's tough for any number of team members to participate under those circumstances, although I'm amiable to debate on that issue (dead ball after made free throw).

That just leaves a dead ball with the clock running up for debate. Can team members participate, and be penalized, under those circumstances?

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

We can all agree that we can penalize during live balls, even if the clock isn't running, no need for discussion on that. Team members are always participating under those circumstances

If live ball penalties can be assessed, regardless of the clock status, then why can't the same be said for dead ball penalties? Ergo, status of the clock is irrelevant.

To me, you have live/dead ball penalties and the clock's status has no affect.

You seem to be focusing on a specific dead ball period (after made basket). What about the others such as just before tip-off, before a throw-in, or before a free throw. When the officials see 5+ players on the court, there is no penalty, they just get rid of (so to speak) the extras. So why not apply the same concept to your dead ball period? Does that not seem logical?

Indeed, it is the only situation in which the ball status goes live-dead-live automatically but to me, it stands to reason to apply how it is handled in the same manner as the other situations.

Love your passion and not even trying to convince you of anything, only offering how I handle it given written words in the rule book. I will definitely throw this at our state interpreter and see what kind of feedback comes.

[BillyMac]

Good post.

Originally Posted by bucky

... after made basket ... before tip-off, before a throw-in, or before a free throw.

When are team members participating? Certainly not during the dead ball period before the live ball of a jump ball or during the dead ball period before a live ball of a designated spot throwin.

NFHS rules, as presently written, don't use live ball/dead ball, or the status of the clock, to determine extra team member rulings (penalties, or send extra man back) but rather base the ruling on "participation", which it doesn't define. Other Forum members want to simply use live ball/dead ball, I just added the status of the clock into the mix for discussion purposes because I believe that team members can be participating during times other than live balls.

Originally Posted by bucky

I will definitely throw this at our state interpreter and see what kind of feedback comes.

Please do. My questions to trainers were just answered with, "Don't let it happen, do a better job of preventing six players from entering, or staying on the court".

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS rules, as presently written, don't use live ball/dead ball, or the status of the clock, to determine extra team member rulings (penalties, or send extra man back) but rather base the ruling on "participation", which it doesn't define.

Not true. The NFHS defines participating in the Case Book ruling already cited in this thread.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Not true. The NFHS defines participating in the Case Book ruling already cited in this thread.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

10.2.2 SITUATION: With Team A leading 51 to 50, a held ball is called. A6 properly reports and enters the game. Time is then called by Team A. The clock shows two seconds remaining in the game. After play is resumed by a throw-in, the officials: (a) recognize that A has six players competing, but cannot get the clock stopped; or (b) do not notice Team A has six players on the court. Following the throw-in, time expires. Team B now reports to the officials that Team A had six players on the court.
RULING: In (a), since one of the officials had knowledge that Team A had six players participating simultaneously and this was detected prior to time expiring, a technical foul is assessed against Team A. In (b), since it was not recognized by either official, but was called to their attention after time had expired, it is too late to assess any penalty.

Time expired. Everybody is bench personnel. It said time expired, not ball is dead (even though it was). Two variables. Water muddied.

10.5.3 SITUATION: A5 has just received his/her fifth foul of the game. A5 (a) is erroneously permitted to remain in the game for another two minutes before the scorer realizes the mistake; or (b) leaves the game after the coach is notified of the disqualification. At the intermission between the third and fourth quarter, A5 reports as a substitute and subsequently enters the game. RULING: In (a), as soon as the error is discovered, the player is removed from the game, no penalties are assessed. In (b), A5 will not actually "participate" until the ball becomes live. If detected prior to the ball becoming live, A5 would be directed to the bench and no penalty assessed unless the official deemed it was a deliberate attempt to circumvent the rules. If detected after the ball becomes live, it is a technical foul charged directly to the head coach resulting in the loss of coaching-box
privileges. The player is immediately removed from the game and Team B is awarded two free-throws and the ball. (2-11-5 Note 2)

Not about extra players. First (note "prior") live ball sets up the penalty, even if the disqualified player is discovered during a subsequent dead ball. Anything prior to first live ball is not penalized, that's all the ruling states. After that it's open season for a penalty, live ball or dead ball. If the disqualified player eventually leaves the game (undiscovered) and becomes bench personnel, then it may be too late to penalize.

If during a dead ball after the ball first becomes live with the disqualified player (coach was informed) on the court (let's say after an out of bounds violation), the disqualified player (we can call him a player, he's one of five) is discovered, are you not going to penalize, or just send him back to the bench?

[BryanV21]

Doesn't the line "A5 will not actually "participate" until the ball becomes live" solve our issue here?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

... why can the table not be used for any assistance? That is in the rule book ... if the table does recognize it during a live ball, they may hit the horn a few times, and then the ref blows his whistle making the ball dead. In that case, where it was discovered during a live ball, it becomes irrelevant because the ref blew his whistle making the ball dead? That seems illogical.

Just my point.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

10.2.2 SITUATION: With Team A leading 51 to 50, a held ball is called. A6 properly reports and enters the game. Time is then called by Team A. The clock shows two seconds remaining in the game. After play is resumed by a throw-in, the officials: (b) do not notice Team A has six players on the court. Following the throw-in, time expires. Team B now reports to the officials that Team A had six players on the court. RULING: In (b), since it was not recognized by either official, but was called to their attention after time had expired, it is too late to assess any penalty.

Just for laughs, change "Team B" to "table".

Can no penalty be assessed because (1) it wasn't actually observed by an on court official, or because (2) it was to late to penalize (dead ball and clock stopped)?

To me, doubling up on the reasons not to penalize is overkill and makes the ruling unclear, correct, but unclear. As a chemist, we try to change one variable at a time, otherwise we muddy the waters (I did A and B, the procedure was successful, was the procedure successful because I did A, or because I did B? Well, at least it was successful, Why? I don't know.).

Or, (3) does the change to "table" change the situation and thus the interpretation (ruling)?

I have questions. I don't have answers. Others may have answers. Still others may just have opinions.