In-game protest considered by State tourney admin?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Bottom-line, coach's team was not unfairly or adversely affected by the substitution. If he wanted a different player to come in also, he could have subbed that player in after the 1st free throw.

The disqualification period is not a free time-out.

Agree. There was ultimately no harm.

Why do we say it isn't a free timeout. It more or less is. While it isn't actually a timeout, there is nothing in the rules that restricts how they can use the time....only that it ends when the sub is provided and the sub must be provided by 15 seconds. They are given the 15 seconds to pick the sub AND to instruct the team on how they are going to adapt to losing the DQ'd player.

And it isn't free...they get it at the expense of losing a player.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Agree. There was ultimately no harm.



Why do we say it isn't a free timeout. It more or less is. While it isn't actually a timeout, there is nothing in the rules that restricts how they can use the time....only that it ends when the sub is provided and the sub must be provided by 15 seconds. They are given the 15 seconds to pick the sub AND to instruct the team on how they are going to adapt to losing the DQ'd player.



And it isn't free...they get it at the expense of losing a player.

If he can get all his players to run from the far end of the Court and hurdle while he's also choosing a sub within that 15 second time period, more power to him.

But the argument that he was not allowed to confer with his team therefore he was put at a disadvantage is bogus.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Jesse James]

Had Renton’s opponent only been in 1-1, and not double bonus—could Renton’s coach in theory gotten a long unofficial timeout? While he is talking to his four on the floor—what is is stopping the assistant from replacing the DQ player with S6, then nearing the time players set, bring S7 to the table to replace S6 who slowly walks toward the bench. Rinse and repeat until he’s on his last legal sub.

Wouldn’t that be legal?

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Had Renton’s opponent only been in 1-1, and not double bonus—could Renton’s coach in theory gotten a long unofficial timeout? While he is talking to his four on the floor—what is is stopping the assistant from replacing the DQ player with S6, then nearing the time players set, bring S7 to the table to replace S6 who slowly walks toward the bench. Rinse and repeat until he’s on his last legal sub.

Wouldn’t that be legal?

Yes. First things first, you have to take care of the DQ situation. But then your scenario could very well play out. Also could apply in a multiple throw if he decided to pull such a stunt after the first throw.

Coaches use the staggered subs trick all the time to lengthen dead balls and give their players a few extra breaths. Your scenario would be nothing more than an exaggeration of this ploy. If it happens, I would probably chuckle more than anything else, but I'd also go over to the table to make sure the scorer is tracking who comes off so that they don't try to go back in before time runs off. We can have fun for a while, but there's a rule-based limit.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Agree. There was ultimately no harm.

Why do we say it isn't a free timeout. It more or less is. While it isn't actually a timeout, there is nothing in the rules that restricts how they can use the time....only that it ends when the sub is provided and the sub must be provided by 15 seconds. They are given the 15 seconds to pick the sub AND to instruct the team on how they are going to adapt to losing the DQ'd player.

And it isn't free...they get it at the expense of losing a player.

They have 15 seconds from when I start the clock.

"John, that's five." To timer, without delay: Start the clock / horn.

That sub better be ready to come in by the second horn. And then those 2 players on the FT spaces better be moving towards them.

Unlike crosscountry, I have never given leeway on this. Sub ready by second horn or we're shooting free throws.

If the coach can do that AND talk to his kids, more power to him.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

They have 15 seconds from when I start the clock.

"John, that's five." To timer, without delay: Start the clock / horn.

That sub better be ready to come in by the second horn. And then those 2 players on the FT spaces better be moving towards them.

Unlike crosscountry, I have never given leeway on this. Sub ready by second horn or we're shooting free throws.

If the coach can do that AND talk to his kids, more power to him.

Totally agree.

If that period of time was meant to be for conferring with players the NFHS would not have reduced the timeframe down to 15 seconds and would not have added a preliminary horn. They did this to eliminate that time period from being a defacto time-out. They want coaches to choose a sub and get him/her to the table.

[so cal lurker]

But what the heck was there to "protest"? He didn't get to coach the players on how to play defense on a made FT? He though they should wipe the two FTs and have to retake them?

It's also odd because (at least according to the graphic) he had three TOs left--so if talking to his team was actually his goal (as opposed to being PO'd and wanting to make a stink), he would have just called one of them--he wasn't going to need all three in 10 seconds.

[sj]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

But what the heck was there to "protest"? He didn't get to coach the players on how to play defense on a made FT? He though they should wipe the two FTs and have to retake them?

It's also odd because (at least according to the graphic) he had three TOs left--so if talking to his team was actually his goal (as opposed to being PO'd and wanting to make a stink), he would have just called one of them--he wasn't going to need all three in 10 seconds.

That's what I'm wondering too.They spent seven minutes talking about it. What exactly was he wanting changed? Announcers can't be relied on but they're saying the coach wanted to wipe off the free throws?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Totally agree.



If that period of time was meant to be for conferring with players the NFHS would not have reduced the timeframe down to 15 seconds and would not have added a preliminary horn. They did this to eliminate that time period from being a defacto time-out. They want coaches to choose a sub and get him/her to the table.

I don't get people who sit idly by during this time.

I'm in there making sure that second horn doesn't go. Coach, NEED A SUB, please.

I've had one career stare down during this interval. As the second horn blew, I whacked the coach.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Rich

I don't get people who sit idly by during this time.

I'm in there making sure that second horn doesn't go. Coach, NEED A SUB, please.

I've had one career stare down during this interval. As the second horn blew, I whacked the coach.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I agree. once or twice i had to keep asking the coach to not let it get to the second horn, pretty sure both times T's were involved. One of the times the coach plays the "send the kid as soon as the horn sounds game." Too late, I already asked for the sub about 5-10 times. You used up all your courtesies.