Disqualification Substitutes ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Is there something controversial about that ruling in Connecticut?

Our three local interpreters, going back over forty years, before our present interpreter, all advised us to "take care of business" before we allowed any substitutes into the game (and granted any timeouts).

Many of our veterans got this question wrong on our IAABO Refresher Exam.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

That ruling has never, as far as I know, been in doubt. It's not the same as the test question that ... had you so worked up.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

26) B-1 fouls A-1, committing their fifth personal foul. While waiting for B-1’s replacement, A-6 and A-7 approach the table to enter the game. The official denies their entry, stating that A-6 and A-7 must wait and enter with B-1’s replacement. Was the official correct?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Play #4: In the 4th quarter, A2 is called for their 5th personal foul and is disqualified from the game. B6 and B7 were already at the table when the foul was called. After the official beckons A6 in to replace A2, they tell B6 and B7 they must remain at the table until after the first free throw. Is the official correct?

There's an interpretation difference between "approach(ing) the table" and "already at the table"?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Our three local interpreters, going back over forty years, before our present interpreter, all advised us to "take care of business" before we allowed any substitutes into the game (and granted any timeouts).

Many of our veterans got this question wrong on our IAABO Refresher Exam.

And the play you just quoted that I responded to, how does that fall out of line with taking care of business and then allowing other subs?

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Play #4: In the 4th quarter, A2 is called for their 5th personal foul
and is disqualified from the game. B6 and B7 were already at the
table when the foul was called. After the official beckons A6 in to
replace A2, they tell B6 and B7 they must remain at the table until
after the first free throw. Is the official, correct?
Answer: No, the official is not correct. If a disqualified player
needs to be replaced, this is an opportunity for both teams to
substitute and any player may enter the game. (IAABO Rules
Guide 3:3:1 Exception)

Originally Posted by Raymond

And the play you just quoted that I responded to, how does that fall out of line with taking care of business and then allowing other subs?

Play #4 (possibly just an IAABO interpretation) interpretation allows substitutes to enter before the replacement for the disqualified player is beckoned and replaced, the final part of taking care of business

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There's an interpretation difference between "approach(ing) the table" and "already at the table"?

bob jenkins: Now I see another difference, the "first free throw" restriction.

[BillyMac]

Bottom line: Assuming the coach takes the entirety of his allotted fifteen seconds to replace the disqualified player, what substitutes are allowed, or not allowed, to enter during that fifteen second time frame before the required replacement?

Nobody? Those on the X? Those on the way to the X?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There's an interpretation difference between "approach(ing) the table" and "already at the table"?

You seem to be focused too much on the action of Team B (with the subs) and not the actions of Team A (with the DQ player).

In both the test question and play#4, B has playes at the table before A has the replacement ready. In the test question, the official makes those players wait until the replacement is ready. In play #4, the officil makes the players wait even BEYOND the replacement until the next FT (the normal opportunity to substitute).

The issue is: When can the subs enter? Before the official notifies the player / coach and starts the timer? (We all agree this is NO, I think). While we are waiting for the replacement to come to the table? (the controversy). Along with the replacement after s/he has reported? (we all agree this is YES, I think) After the first FT? (question #4 and we all agree this is NO, I think).

IAABO m9ight also make some distinction between subs who are at the table before the replacement or those who are on their way, or those who come a bit later. For me, I'm treating it just as we do during most sub situations -- here, that generally means allowing the sub. The play is already stopped / delayed, so get all the subs in and (potentially) avoid delaying the game again at the next clock stoppage.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In both the test question and play#4, B has players at the table before A has the replacement ready. In the test question, the official makes those players wait until the replacement is ready. In play #4, the official makes the players wait even BEYOND the replacement until the next FT (the normal opportunity to substitute). The issue is: When can the subs enter? Before the official notifies the player/coach and starts the timer? (We all agree this is NO, I think). While we are waiting for the replacement to come to the table? (the controversy). Along with the replacement after s/he has reported? (we all agree this is YES, I think). After the first FT? (question #4 and we all agree this is NO, I think). IAABO might also make some distinction between subs who are at the table before the replacement or those who are on their way, or those who come a bit later. For me, I'm treating it just as we do during most sub situations, here, that generally means allowing the sub. The play is already stopped/delayed, so get all the subs in and (potentially) avoid delaying the game again at the next clock stoppage.

A very well thought out, rational, and wise interpretation.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Play #4 (possibly just an IAABO interpretation) interpretation allows substitutes to enter before the replacement for the disqualified player is beckoned and replaced, the final part of taking care of business

Where did you post the interpretation that says the subs can come in before?

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Where did you post the interpretation that says the subs can come in before?

Saturday.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Play #4: In the 4th quarter, A2 is called for their 5th personal foul
and is disqualified from the game. B6 and B7 were already at the
table when the foul was called. After the official beckons A6 in to
replace A2, they tell B6 and B7 they must remain at the table until
after the first free throw. Is the official, correct?
Answer: No, the official is not correct. If a disqualified player
needs to be replaced, this is an opportunity for both teams to
substitute and any player may enter the game. (IAABO Rules
Guide 3:3:1 Exception)

Granted, this is not exactly the same as the Refresher Exam question that have been complaining about, but is similar.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bottom line: Assuming the coach takes the entirety of his allotted fifteen seconds to replace the disqualified player, what substitutes are allowed, or not allowed, to enter during that fifteen second time frame before the required replacement?

Nobody? Those on the X? Those on the way to the X?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Saturday.



Granted, this is not exactly the same as the Refresher Exam question that have been complaining about, but is similar.

Apparently you misunderstood my question. What case play or citation did you provide that says those other substitutes can come in BEFORE the disqualified player is replaced?



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Apparently you misunderstood my question. What case play or citation did you provide that says those other substitutes can come in BEFORE the disqualified player is replaced?

3-3-1-C Substitution: ... Note: When a player is disqualified or directed to leave the game, both teams my substitute up until it is time to put the ball in play.

2003-04 NFHS Points of Emphasis
5) Substituting Player - Disqualifications
H) If a substitute from the non-offending team or a substitute for the offending team for someone other than the disqualified player reports to the scorer during the wait for the required substitute, they may enter the game. (3-3-1-D)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

3-3-1-C Substitution: ... Note: When a player is disqualified or directed to leave the game, both teams my substitute up until it is time to put the ball in play.



2003-04 NFHS Points of Emphasis

5) Substituting Player - Disqualifications

H) If a substitute from the non-offending team or a substitute for the offending team for someone other than the disqualified player reports to the scorer during the wait for the required substitute, they may enter the game. (3-3-1-D)

So IAABO is still using that 2004 citation while the NFHS is not?

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So IAABO is still using that 2004 citation while the NFHS is not?

I believe that the IAABO interpretation (let them all in) has possibly taken the new (in red below) 2024-25 editorial change 3-3-1-C Substitution: Note ...

Substitution: 3-3-1-C: During multiple free throws resulting from personal fouls, substitutions may be made only before the final attempt in the sequence and after the final attempt has been scored. Note: When a player is disqualified or directed to leave the game, both teams may substitute up until it is time to put the ball in play.

(The word "Exception" has been replaced by "Note".)

... a step too far, using it to allow all substitutions during the replacement period even when the replacement period will not be followed by any free throws (simple five foul disqualification, not in the bonus).

It appears that IAABO has interpreted the new note independently, on its own, of the other language in the rule involving free throws.

I'm not sure that that's what the NFHS intended, but there was an IAABO representative (who edits our IAABO Refresher Exams questions and answers) on the NFHS 2024-25 rules committee.

I would certainly welcome a casebook play or annual interpretation from NFHS describing substitutions during a replacement period that will not be followed by any free throws.

[Raymond]

The 2024-25 interpretation definitely does not say anything about BEFORE.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk