Disqualification Substitutes ...

[BillyMac]

This situation was discussed on the Forum about a month ago.

It came up again last night at an IAABO Refresher Exam study group.

About a dozen and a half guys, including a few good "rules guys", couldn't come up with a consensus answer.

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?

IAABO answer is "No".

Reference cited for this question is 3-3-1-C.

3-3-1-C Substitution: 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 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)

2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 10: A1 fouls out of the game. The Team A coach talks to a substitute and within 15 seconds sends the substitute to the table to report in the game. A Team B player then requests a time-out. RULING: Since a time-out may not be granted until a disqualified player is replaced, the administering official should ask the substitute at the table if he/she is the replacement for A1. If so, the time-out may be granted. If not, the substitute shall remain at the table and the coach must still replace A1 within the specified timeframe before the time-out may be granted. (3-3-1, 5-8-3b, 10-6-2)

Is there a NFHS rule that tells the reporting official not to allow the substitutes to enter before the head coach replaces the disqualified player?

[Raymond]

The intent of the rule is for all other action to cease until the substitution has been made.

The word "also" in 3-3-1 C is significant.

Not allowing teammates to enter before the disqualified player is subbed out is also significant.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

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?

IAABO answer is "No".

Does this have any impact on the interpretation?

NFHS 2024-25 Editorial Rule Change:
3-3-1-C-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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

The word "also" in 3-3-1 C is significant.

"Also" is no longer in the rule:

3-3-1-C Substitution: 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 my substitute up until it is time to put the ball in play.

[BillyMac]

After much research, here's what I came up with regarding this topic (most is repeated from above).

I can't seem to come up with a clear answer.

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. Is the official correct?

Locally, we’ve been taught, for forty-plus years, no substitutes and no timeouts until a replacement is made.

IAABO answer No.

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)

2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 10: A1 fouls out of the game. The Team A coach talks to a substitute and within 15 seconds sends the substitute to the table to report in the game. A Team B player then requests a time-out. RULING: Since a time-out may not be granted until a disqualified player is replaced, the administering official should ask the substitute at the table if he/she is the replacement for A1. If so, the time-out may be granted. If not, the substitute shall remain at the table and the coach must still replace A1 within the specified timeframe before the time-out may be granted. (3-3-1, 5-8-3b, 10-6-2)

We’ve got a 2003-04 NFHS Points of Emphasis that says that if a substitute (from either or both teams) for someone other than the disqualified player reports to the scorer during the wait for the required substitute, they may enter the game.

Conversely, we’ve got a more recent 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation that appears to say that the substitute shall remain at the table until the disqualified player has been replaced.

5-8-3-B Time-Out, Stopping Play: Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, must be stopped when an official: Grants and signals a player’s/head coach’s oral or visual request for a time-out, such request being granted only when: The ball is dead, unless replacement of a disqualified, or injured player(s), or a player directed to leave the game is pending, and a substitute(s) is available and required.

Here’s a recent editorial change that may, or may not, impact (I say no) the Refresher Exam question:

NFHS 2024-25 Editorial Rule Change:
3-3-1-C-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.

Explanation: If any player has been directed to leave the game, an exception permits substitutes from both teams who have legally reported to the scorer to enter the game before the last free throw ... All substitutes meeting this exception may enter the game until the official has beckoned the required sub onto the floor. At that time, any additional substitutes reporting to the table must wait until the first of two or the second of three free throws to enter the game.

My opinion, the new editorial change simply tells us that these “early” reporting substitutes don’t have to wait until the "usual" time interval before the last free throw, but may come in “early” with the required substitute.

Does anybody have better citations for Yes or No?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 10: A1 fouls out of the game. The Team A coach talks to a substitute and within 15 seconds sends the substitute to the table to report in the game. A Team B player then requests a time-out. RULING: Since a time-out may not be granted until a disqualified player is replaced, the administering official should ask the substitute at the table if he/she is the replacement for A1. If so, the time-out may be granted. If not, the substitute shall remain at the table and the coach must still replace A1 within the specified timeframe before the time-out may be granted. (3-3-1, 5-8-3b, 10-6-2)

Is this (above) the one and only citation we have to deny other substitutes entry until the disqualified player has been substituted for?

Was there a rule change after the Point of Emphasis in 2003-04 to support this 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation?

Too bad the 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation deals with both substitutes and a timeout request.

It would have been more "cut and dry" with just the substitution with no the timeout request to "gum up the works".

I guess that we got two interpretations for the price of one?

The timeout request is an easy interpretation based on a very clear rule.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

5-8-3-B Time-Out, Stopping Play: Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, must be stopped when an official: Grants and signals a player’s/head coach’s oral or visual request for a time-out, such request being granted only when: The ball is dead, unless replacement of a disqualified, or injured player(s), or a player directed to leave the game is pending, and a substitute(s) is available and required.

What's the rule basis for the substitution part of the interpretation?

Is the single 2020-21 interpretation enough "ammunition" to challenge my local (and state) interpreter?

I could really use some closure here.

It's the only item from the IAABO Refresher Exam that continues to "bug me".

While this started out about me getting the exam question correct, I've now moved on to where I really want to know the true rule.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

While I am late in joining the discussion I have been following it. That said, ...

When the NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Committees adopted the Timing Period Rule a couple of decades ago I can say with great certainty (without climbing into the attic to go through file boxes) that the protocol for the Situation being discussed was: Beckon A6 and A7 in to the game with B6 but not until after B6 had reported to the Scorer. The Rationale was that nothing can happen until B6 has Reported to the Scorer.

The most important thing is:* When a Player for whom a Substitute is required:* a) Disqualified: b) Injured/Sick; c) Uniform Infraction/Jewelry; or d) Blood, the HC has a defined Time Period in which to have a Substitute report to the Scorer and per Rule, nothing else can happen until the Substitute has Reported to the Scorer.* And that Protocol has been in place*for as long as when the Rule was adopted that put a Time Period for Replacing the Player with a Substitute.

I would then beckon B6 into the Game followed by quickly beckoning A6 and A7 into the Game, but in actuality, I was beckoning all of them (B6, A6, and A7) into the Game at the same time.

The discussion really is about semantics. Yes, the Rule could be better worded but no rule is being broken by waiting until B6 has reported to the Scorer and then all of the Substitutes are brought into the game at the same time.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

... without climbing into the attic to go through file boxes ...

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. Is the official correct?

IAABO says no, the official was incorrect.

No need to climb up into your cold dark attic with the other old bats, just answer me this.

Is 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation SITUATION 10 enough of a citation to deny entry to other substitutes before the replacement the disqualified player?

2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 10: A1 fouls out of the game. The Team A coach talks to a substitute and within 15 seconds sends the substitute to the table to report in the game. A Team B player then requests a time-out. RULING: Since a time-out may not be granted until a disqualified player is replaced, the administering official should ask the substitute at the table if he/she is the replacement for A1. If so, the time-out may be granted. If not, the substitute shall remain at the table and the coach must still replace A1 within the specified timeframe before the time-out may be granted. (3-3-1, 5-8-3b, 10-6-2)

[BillyMac]

While I just started the process of sending this question up the IAABO ladder for explanation, I have a feeling that I am tilting at windmills.

Locally, we’ve been taught, for forty-plus years, no substitutes and no timeouts until a replacement is made.

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?

IAABO answer is no.

Perhaps the combination of the 2003-04 NFHS Points of Emphasis and the more recent 2024-25 Editorial Change makes the no answer correct?

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.

2024-25 Editorial Change
3-3-1-C Substitution: 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 my substitute up until it is time to put the ball in play.

Perhaps the recent 2024-25 Editorial Change Note was not only about beckoning such substitutes before the last free throw?

Perhaps my belief to not allow other substitutes to enter until the disqualified player had been replaced was not rule based, but rather based on a local best practice to ensure that the disqualified player was replaced in a correct and timely manner?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

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. Is the official correct?

IAABO says no, the official was incorrect.

No need to climb up into your cold dark attic with the other old bats, just answer me this.

Is 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation SITUATION 10 enough of a citation to deny entry to other substitutes before the replacement the disqualified player?

2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 10: A1 fouls out of the game. The Team A coach talks to a substitute and within 15 seconds sends the substitute to the table to report in the game. A Team B player then requests a time-out. RULING: Since a time-out may not be granted until a disqualified player is replaced, the administering official should ask the substitute at the table if he/she is the replacement for A1. If so, the time-out may be granted. If not, the substitute shall remain at the table and the coach must still replace A1 within the specified timeframe before the time-out may be granted. (3-3-1, 5-8-3b, 10-6-2)

Originally Posted by BillyMac

While I just started the process of sending this question up the IAABO ladder for explanation, I have a feeling that I am tilting at windmills.

Locally, we’ve been taught, for forty-plus years, no substitutes and no timeouts until a replacement is made.

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?

IAABO answer is no.

Perhaps the combination of the 2003-04 NFHS Points of Emphasis and the more recent 2024-25 Editorial Change makes the no answer correct?

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.

2024-25 Editorial Change
3-3-1-C Substitution: 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 my substitute up until it is time to put the ball in play.

Perhaps the recent 2024-25 Editorial Change Note was not only about beckoning such substitutes before the last free throw?

Perhaps my belief to not allow other substitutes to enter until the disqualified player had been replaced was not rule based, but rather based on a local best practice to ensure that the disqualified player was replaced in a correct and timely manner?

Billy:

I apologize for not responding until now.

1) For as long as I can remember the NFHS (and NCAA Men's/Women's as well) position is: Nothing can happen until the Substitute for the Disqualified Player has Reported to the Scorer.

2) Once A6 has Reported to the Scorer, all Substitutes who are waiting to Enter the Game can be Beckoned into the Game a nanosecond after A6 has been Beckoned into the Game.

3) Now any TO Requests can be Granted.

Therefore, to answer your question regarding 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations SITUATION 10 is: A responding YES!

But what about:

2003-04 NFHS Basketball Point of Emphasis 5-H

and

2024-25 NFHS Basketball Editorial Change R3-S3-A1c

They are just poorly worded Footnotes (both before and after) to the 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations SITUATION 10 which reminds us all of what the NFHS (and NCAA Men's/Women's) have been telling how it is to be done for decades.

MTD, Sr.

P.S. I hope that everyone and their families had a Happy Thanksgiving!

[Mike Goodwin]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

While I just started the process of sending this question up the IAABO ladder for explanation, I have a feeling that I am tilting at windmills.

Locally, we’ve been taught, for forty-plus years, no substitutes and no timeouts until a replacement is made.

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?

IAABO answer is no.

Perhaps my belief to not allow other substitutes to enter until the disqualified player had been replaced was not rule based, but rather based on a local best practice to ensure that the disqualified player was replaced in a correct and timely manner?

BillyMac, what's the downside, if any, to allowing A6 & A7 into the game after informing the Team B HC that B1 is disqualified? I'm not seeing any. Team A still can't request a time-out until after B1 is replaced but opponent(s) entering? It doesn't seem to be an issue.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mike Goodwin

BillyMac, what's the downside, if any, to allowing A6 & A7 into the game after informing the Team B HC that B1 is disqualified? I'm not seeing any. Team A still can't request a time-out until after B1 is replaced but opponent(s) entering? It doesn't seem to be an issue.

It appears that Mike Goodwin agrees with the IAABO answer, let A6 and A7 in before the disqualified player is replaced.

Despite what my friend Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. posted, I'm starting to agree with Mike Goodwin (and IAABO).

Was there ever a NFHS rule that said no substitutes until a replacement is made?

Can anybody cite the rule (or mechanic)?

Or was it just a local "best practice" to ensure that the disqualified player was replaced in a correct and timely manner?

If it was a rule, when did it change?

If it was never a rule, was the 2003-04 NFHS Points of Emphasis due to some confusion about the disqualification process?

And finally, the straw I've been grasping at for several weeks, why does 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rule Interpretations Situation 10 instruct us that "the substitute shall remain at the table" if indeed there is no such rule to deny substitutes entry before the disqualified player is replaced?

I'm desperate for some closure here.

And it's gone way beyond me getting the exam question right or wrong, I really want to know the rule.

[BillyMac]

This just showed up on the IAABO website today.





Was there ever a NFHS rule that said no substitutes until a replacement is made?

If so, did that change, and if there was a change, when?

[bob jenkins]

No one disputed what's in the slides. Still doesn't answer the test question.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No one disputed what's in the slides. Still doesn't answer the test question.

Agree that the wording in NFHS 2024-25 Editorial Rule Change 3-3-1-C-Note is quite poor.

NFHS 2024-25 Editorial Rule Change 3-3-1-C-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.

Explanation: If any player has been directed to leave the game, an exception permits substitutes from both teams who have legally reported to the scorer to enter the game before the last free throw ... All substitutes meeting this exception may enter the game until the official has beckoned the required sub onto the floor. At that time, any additional substitutes reporting to the table must wait until the first of two or the second of three free throws to enter the game.

But so is 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation Situation 10 due to the added complexity of a timeout.

2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
Situation 10: A1 fouls out of the game. The Team A coach talks to a substitute and within 15 seconds sends the substitute to the table to report in the game. A Team B player then requests a time-out. RULING: Since a time-out may not be granted until a disqualified player is replaced, the administering official should ask the substitute at the table if he/she is the replacement for A1. If so, the time-out may be granted. If not, the substitute shall remain at the table and the coach must still replace A1 within the specified timeframe before the time-out may be granted. (3-3-1, 5-8-3b, 10-6-2)

On the other hand, the 2003-04 NFHS Points of Emphasis is very clearly written, simple, and straightforward.

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.

So again I ask: Was there ever a NFHS rule that said no substitutes until a replacement is made? If so, did that change, and if there was a change, when?

Can somebody actually cite the original rule (or mechanic) that said no substitutes until a replacement is made?

We do have such a clear, simple, and straightforward rule to deny a timeout request until a replacement is made.

Rule 5 - Section 8 Time-Out, Stopping Play
Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, must be stopped when an official:
Art.. 3 . . . Grants and signals a player’s/head coach’s oral or visual request for a time-out, such request being granted only when:
b. The ball is dead, unless replacement of a disqualified, or injured player(s), or a player directed to leave the game is pending, and a substitute(s) is available and required.

Why can't we pinpoint such a clear, simple, and straightforward rule that denies substitutes until a replacement is made?