Disqualification Substitutes ...
 

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?

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

Editorial Change ...
 

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.

Also ...
 

"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.

Denies Entry ...
 

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?

2003-04 Is A Long Time Ago ...
 

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.
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.

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.

Old Bats ...
 

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)

The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote Of La Mancha ...
 

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!

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.

What Is The Rule ???
 

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.

But When Do Substitutes Get Beckoned ???
 

This just showed up on the IAABO website today.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...97abb290_c.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...144094da_c.jpg

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?

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

Poor Language ...
 

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?

Why do you need a rule here? We don't skip straight to getting subs before any other to dead ball business that we are doing. They're last priority.

Make report
Go through DQ process if needed
Grant TO if requested
Beckon Subs
Resume Play.

Substituting Player ...
 

Ignore this?

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.

Please give me a simple citation (rule or mechanic) that says otherwise.

Try to avoid citing 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation Situation 10 due to the added complexity of a timeout request.

Sure but note that the rule says "may" you don't have to bring them in at that time. You can do what you want as long as your crew isn't distracted.

Keep It Simple ...
 

Would love to see a simple citation that says that you don't have to bring them in at that time, that it's "optional".

Again, try to avoid citing 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation Situation 10 due to the added complexity of a timeout request.

I'm really starting to believe that what I used to think was an actual rule was, in reality, a local "best practice" (always wear black underpants, always carry a second whistle, always carry a pin in your jacket pocket) to ensure that the disqualified player was replaced in a correct, organized, and timely manner.

It wasn't a unique local practice. It was common sense application that most of us adhered to.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Best Practice ...
 

By the responses on two recent threads, I figured such.

👍 What I said in my original comment.

Closure ...
 

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.

I've been researching this question and answer for two months and may have finally gotten some closure (at least from IAABO).

Here's the answer I got from my local interpreter, also the Connecticut state interpreter, and also the assistant chair of the IAABO international Rules Examination Committee.

The answer is no. All substitutes that are at the table and ready to go in may enter the game before the replacement player for B-1. However, we generally have officials ensure that the replacement player for B-1 is our primary focus. Get the replacement player checked in, as well as the substitutes for either team.

I could not find anything to back up my yes answer (other than a single 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation Situation 10, poorly worded and complicated by a timeout request).

And the 2003-04 NFHS Point of Emphasis clearly tells us than if a substitute other than the replacement reports to the scorer during the wait for the required substitute they may enter the game.

It appears that no substitutes until a replacement is made is not an actual rule or mechanic, but a “best practice” to ensure that the replacement was made in a proper, correct, organized, and timely manner.

In almost all cases (except after the warning horn during a time out, or between multiple free throws) we can’t deny an eligible (sat a tick, not disqualified, etc.) substitution during a dead ball stopped clock situation, even after a live ball whistle to prevent a substitute from entering when they shouldn't come in.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

BillyMac out.

We arent denying a sub entry....Theyre still coming in in when theyre allowed to.

Dead Ball Stopped Clock ...
 

Whenever the official doesn't beckon, that official is denying entry (at that time).

With few (see above) exceptions (and disqualification is not one of the exceptions) we can’t deny an eligible (see above) substitution during any dead ball stopped clock situation.

3-3-1-D: If entry is at any time other than between quarters, and a substitute who is entitled and ready to enter reports to the scorer, the scorer must use a sounding device or game horn, if, or as soon as, the ball is dead and the clock is stopped.

So if we don't beckon Subs night . millisecond after the.bsll is dead we're denying the subs?

The horn can blow as much as it wants but we'll beckon them when we're ready to do so.

Why ???
 

You would force a substitute, who had already reported to the table (maybe quite a while ago), and was already sitting on the X (maybe quite a while ago), to just sit there for an additional fifteen seconds (15 thousand milliseconds) with no NFHS rule basis to back you up?

3-3-1-D: If entry is at any time other than between quarters, and a substitute who is entitled and ready to enter reports to the scorer, the scorer must use a sounding device or game horn, if, or as soon as, the ball is dead and the clock is stopped.

I do understand that this may be a perfectly acceptable local, state, regional, national, or international custom or "best practice", but it doesn't have any basis in the current NFHS rulebook.

In fact, in a real game situation, I would probably do it myself (it's perfectly acceptable in my little corner of Connecticut), especially if there was any indication of confusion with the table or the coach, but I wouldn't answer such on a written test (as I did, getting it wrong).

Remember, this entire thread, as well as most of a previous thread, was all about a written test question and answer, not a real game.

We have some good officials who, after a live ball whistle to prevent a substitute from entering when they shouldn't come in, then refuse to beckon him in, with no rule basis to back them.

That's why I will try a live ball "stop sign" and an oral "Stay out" before I sound my whistle to prevent a technical foul, because once the ball is dead and the clock is stopped, by rule, I have to beckon him in.

Or you can say, I'll let you in as soon as we finish this business.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

When In Rome ...
 

Exactly.

Bachman-Turner Overdrive - Takin' Care Of Business (1974)

https://youtu.be/0y-_WGjZgD8?feature=shared

Attitude ...
 

One thing that I hate about disqualifications are coaches who send the replacement the table and X (not noted by the calling official) as soon as one calls the fifth foul on a player, before the foul is actually reported.

The table informs the official that it's the player's fifth foul, you inform the head coach and the coach tells you, "He already reported", but the tone of his voice actually says, "He already reported ass**le".

Just ask the sub, "Are you coming in for xx?"

The, "Coach, I know you know, but that was 5 on xx" and beckon the sub.

Takes 3 seconds total.

Table ...
 

Also hate it when the player, coach, and table (but not the official) all realize it's the fifth foul on a player and just treat it like a "normal" substitution, without informing the official that a player has been disqualified.

They don't realize that the official informing the head coach is mandated by rule to inform the head coach.

I've also has a few partners who have allowed this (not informing the head coach) to happen when they know it's the player's fifth foul.

Order Of Importance ...
 

So talk to the substitutes on the X before I inform the coach?

Every single time there are substitutes on the X before I report the foul?

Just on the slight chance the the head coach might give me some attitude?

If you pay almost any attention at all, you will know (a) when the player commits his fifth foul and, (b) whether the sub reports before or after the foul.

A sub almost immediately after the foul is committed is more likely to be for that player.

And, even if a sub is already there, most of the time it's only one.

But, yes, you need to read the situation.

Finesse ...
 

With no cartilage left between my right heel and foot, I'm just working middle school games where we never have player's fouls listed on the scoreboard, we're lucky just to have team fouls displayed.

And yes, we do have to "read the room" and sometimes communication with head coaches requires a certain degree of "finesse".

While I've never done it myself, over the many years, I've had a few partners ask me to inform the coach of the disqualified player when I was not the reporting official.

One thing that I will do in pregame is to tell my partner that if I charge a coach with technical foul, I don't want to be the one to remind him if he forgets to sit down.

"Coach, that's 5, is he/she their sub?"

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

The first thing we need to do is ask Mr. Peabody to use his Wayback Machine to take us back to when the Rules Committee changed the Rules to what is now (2024-25) NFHS R3-S3-A1c:

The Rules Change did not change the fact that a Disqualified Player must be Substituted for immediately. The Rules Committee’s intent has always (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirley) been to let A6, A7, and B6 to enter that game at the same time as B7 (Substitute for the Disqualified Player, B5) but has been very cavalier in how it should be done. The protocol has always been based upon the position that other Substitutes Beckoned/TO Requests Granted/FTs Attempted cannot take place until a Substitute for B5 has Reported to the Scorer.

All 2003-04 NFHS Basketball Points of Emphasis 5-H, 2020-21 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations SITUATION 10, and 2024-25 NFHS R3-S3-A1c NOTE (and its Editorial Change) is reminding us is the R3-S3-A1c does not apply to A6, A7, and B6 when we have B7 Substituting for the Disqualified Player, B5.

Therefore: The Game Official first beckons B7 into the Game followed by beckoning A6, A7, and B6 into the Game but the Beckoning is done in one simultaneous action. This allows the Game Officials to be consistent in how Substitutes are brought into the game while making sure that Substitutes Beckoned/TO Requests Granted/FTs Attempted cannot take place until a Substitute for B5 has Reported to the Scorer.

MTD, Sr.

EDIT (Dec. 20/Fri.(02:35pmEST), 2024): The word immediately was a not the most accurate word to use. The Rule that was adopted is to make the HC replace the Disqualified Player in a timely manner and not use the time allotted as an "uncharged" TO.

3-3-1-d ...
 

Immediately?

Use to be 30 seconds, then 20 seconds, and now 15 seconds, but never "immediately".

Agree with "TO Requests Granted" (5-8-3) and "FTs Attempted" (3-1-1).

Disagree with "other Substitutes Beckoned".

In almost all cases (except after the warning horn during a time out, or between multiple free throws (except for new 3-3-1-C-Note)) we can’t deny an eligible (sat a tick, not disqualified, etc.) substitution during a dead ball stopped clock situation, even after a live ball whistle to prevent a substitute from entering when they shouldn't come in.

3-3-1-D: If entry is at any time other than between quarters, and a substitute who is entitled and ready to enter reports to the scorer, the scorer must use a sounding device or game horn, if, or as soon as, the ball is dead and the clock is stopped.

It was either a state adoption or a "trial rule" for a couple of years -- we used it in IL and had no issues with it (although Ican see someone being too strict on "immediately.")

Instantaneously ...
 

Back in ancient times, when it was 30 seconds, I had a veteran "old school" partner charge a technical foul to the head coach the instant the final disqualification period horn sounded with no replacement at the table. My partner had had it up to his eyeballs with this coach the entire game and was just looking for a reason to T him up.

Bill:

See my EDIT of Dec. 20/Fri.(02:35pmEST), 2024.

MTD, Sr.

Speedy Delivery ...
 

Fully agree.

But I still believe, as IAABO does, that even though it's not a real timeout, the ball is dead and the clock is stopped, and the officials can beckon any substitutes that were (are) at the X before or after the fifth foul was reported and can be beckoned into the game at any time before the disqualified replacement procedure is completed, even if such substitutions are before or between multiple free throws (by new rule 3-3-1-C-Note).

We've may have up to fifteen dead ball stopped clock seconds, letting them all in will not slow down the game.

Disqualified Players And Substitutes
 

News update from today. It's not NFHS. It may not be for the entire IAABO universe. Possibly just for Connecticut.

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)

Is there something controversial about that ruling in Connecticut?

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

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

Takin' Care of Business (Bachman Turner Overdrive, 1973) ...
 

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.

X Marks The Spot ...
 

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

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

Before ...
 

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

First Free Throw ...
 

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

Allowed, Not Allowed ...
 

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?

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.

Always Listen To bob ...
 

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

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

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Any Player May Enter The Game ...
 

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

Before ...
 

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

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

A Bridge Too Far ...
 

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.

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

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Before And After ...
 

Agree,

Nor does it say that the other substitutes must wait until AFTER the replacement is made.

Substitution: 3-3-1-C: 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.

But you specifically said that IAABO or Connecticut, some of your posting can get convoluted so I don't remember which one, explicitly stated other subs could come in before the disqualified player is replaced.

So far the only thing you have cited is a 2004 interpretation. Did IAABO/Connecticut reissue that interpretation?

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Citation ...
 

... and the Substitution: 3-3-1-C: Note citation.

Substitution: 3-3-1-C: 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.

IAABO International told us to let them all in on our 2024-25 Refresher Exam.

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.

I challenged this answer up to the state level and was told the IAABO answer was correct as is, again citing 3-3-1-C.

On the IAABO International level, there was an IAABO representative (who edits our IAABO Refresher Exams questions and answers) on the NFHS 2024-25 rules committee.

My most recent activity was in regard to our Connecticut state interpreter reinforcing the interpretation to let them all in because so many of us Connecticut veterans got this question wrong, including me.

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.

Those facts and the timing of the subs make the two plays not comparable. A referee could wait until after replacement is at the table to let the subs in and would be wrong according to the test question, but right according to the newsletter play #4. No one should get play #4 wrong -- it has never been in doubt. THe test question is the controversial ine.

Not Comparable ...
 

"Not comparable": "At the table" versus "approaching the table".

Interesting point.

Could somebody please post a current NFHS rule citation for holding some, or all, other substitutes until the replacement it made.

It doesn't exist now, but 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.

For now, I'm hanging my hat on this:

Substitution: 3-3-1-C: 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.

It's says "up until", not "when it's time to put the ball in play".

Since starting this thread I've taken a hundred and eighty degree turn and I'm getting dizzy.

You are making distinctions that are not material to the conversation.

"Up until" instead of "when" doesn't matter. Free throw or throw-in does not matter. We are discussing what can happen before the ball becomes live again.

The only pertinent question is are subs allowed before the replacement for the disqualified player?

That's it. That's the question. That's the discussion.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Agreed. During the Replacement Interval, (it's a defined term) or only after, but before the ball is about to become live (or whatever the specific wording is for nay sub situation.)?

NFHS Rule Citation ...
 

Agree 100% but still need an answer to your well worded question and also a NFHS rule citation to support the answer.

Other than the test question, we don't have one. Still.

For me, I am waiting until the replacement gets to (or at least near) the table, to beckon in the other players. What if Coach B (with the regular sub) decides not to sub based on the replacement player?

Matchups ...
 

Similar to my thought.

Replacement player is extremely tall while the disqualified player was extremely short.

Players Do Not Have To Play A Tick ...
 

Of course, the "regular substitute" doesn't have to play, but can substituted for, and then both the "regular substitute" and the player he originally substituted for have to "sit a tick".

The game then becomes a "chess match" between opposing coaches, "I'll sacrifice my rook, because you sacrificed your bishop".

Or just don't allow any other subs until the replacement for the disqualified player, then you don't have to worry about chess moves.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Purpose And Intent ...
 

Whether an actual rule, or simply a "best practice", this was probably the original purpose and intent, along with ensuring that the replacement of the disqualified player was actually accomplished in a timely manner.

Starting over forty years ago we were locally taught that no other substitutes and no timeouts granted until the disqualified player is replaced, but I cannot find a "modern" rule citation for the substitute part of this ancient "best practice".

Can anybody find such?

At one point, Billy mentioned denying subs. A recent event, mini fight, our crew experienced involved a lot of moving pieces. There were FTs, ejections, subs, crowd members involved, game mgmt, reporting to the scorer a bunch of details, explanations to coaches, refs huddling, etc. We pumped the breaks to sort it all out before allowing any subs. We performed the tasks one at a time, very slowly, to ensure that we were following proper procedures. My point is that, at least for me, if there is a lot for my brain to process, then I will absolutely deny a sub until my, or our, thoughts are clear on what to do. There may be times when it is certainly OK to tell a sub to "wait a sec" in order to ensure proper protocols are met. If some coach/observer yells at me for denying a sub because there is no specific rule to do so, I will cite rule 2 section 3 all day long.

Lastly, regarding the plays discussed, I can easily see where only allowing the DQd sub first, quickly followed by the others would be warranted. Coaches/players/subs do all kinds of things quickly and again, citing my previous paragraph, things can get out of order quickly so slowing things down is perfectly acceptable IMO.

2 cents...

Also, I did not see (just browsed really) if anyone submitted the below info in regards to the original post. It was taken from https://www.scribd.com/document/7940...change-summary.


3-3-1c Substitution - 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.

RATIONALE: The current wording makes it sound like the substitutes for the other team had to have already reported before the required substitution...that is not the common practice among most all officials and not, the "spirit and intent" of that rule. This editorial change would simply clarify that IF a player has to be replaced, either because of being disqualified or some other rule infraction, that the opposing team can substitute up until it is time to restart the game.

Closure ...
 

Thanks bucky. Great citation.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...2fc5e0bd_b.jpg

"Say goodnight Gracie."

Still doesn't address what is the only real question in this conversation: can other subs come in before the disqualified player is replaced?

Bucky's citation backs up what 95% of us already do.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

As I have stated before: Hold all of the other Substitutes (A6, A7, B6, B7, etc.) that are already waiting to enter and then bring in the Substitute (B8) for the Disqualified Player (B1) first and then 1 nanosecond (1x10**-9 seconds) after B6 has been beckoned into the Game beckon in A6, A7, B6, B7, etc.

MTD, Sr.

I've been saying that also. But Billy was saying his state or local IAABO chapter put out something saying you can bring other subs in first.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

IAABO Versus NFHS ...
 

IAABO International told us to let them all in on our 2024-25 Refresher Exam.

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.

On the IAABO International level, there was an IAABO representative (who edits our IAABO Refresher Exams questions and answers) on the NFHS 2024-25 rules committee.

But not everyone belongs to IAABO, there are only 15,000 IAABO members and there are certainly a lot more basketball officials than that.

Could somebody please post a current NFHS rule citation for holding some, or all, other substitutes until the replacement it made?

Best Practice ...
 

Is this a "best practice" (to which I agree) or an actual NFHS rule and/or and actual NFHS mechanic?

If so, a citation please.

No. It (apparently) doesn't exist. Despite how many times you ask the question. Maybe next year.

Always Listen To bob ...
 

So IAABO didn't cite a rule that explicitly states other subs can come in first? The only thing stating that is that answer key for the quiz.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

If It's Not Illegal, Then It's Legal ...
 

... nor does there appear to a NFHS citation explicitly stating that other subs cannot come in first.

... and my inquiries up the ladder beginning at the local and state level and eventually to the IAABO International interpreter who sat on the NFHS 2024-25 rules committee and writes our IAABO Refresher Exam questions and answers.

Hey, it happened way back in late October, but let's remember that I used to be on Raymond's (and others) side until I got the question wrong on the exam and then, after much research and inquiry, switched teams.

I think eventually you'll be on the wrong side of history once somebody at the NFHS or IAABO actually thinks this thing through.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Make Disqualified Substitutions Great Again ...
 

I certainly hope so. It was so easy back in the good old days. For over forty years we were locally told to not allow any substitutions, nor grant any timeout requests, until after the disqualified player had been replaced.

This allowed us to take care of business, the notifications to both the head coach and to the disqualified player, and then the timely replacement of the disqualified player, with no other distractions.