|
|||
Quote:
This is a very good question, with regard to last year's rule change regarding timeouts to keep players in the game because of the injury/blood rule. No where in the rule does it say that the coach must specifically state when requesting a timeout that it is for the purpose of keeping the player in the game. The rule also does not address a team requesting successive timeouts if the player is not ready to play at the conclusion of the first timeout. The rule just refers to the end of "the" timeout. NFHS Casebook Play 3.3.6 Situation C only states that A1 must be ready at the end of the timeout. It does not say what happens if A1 is not ready to play. It is my understanding from rules interpretation meetings and articles I have read is that if the play involved is not ready to play by the end of the timeout (meaning the 30 sec (not 20 sec) or 60 sec (not 45 sec)) then his team can replace him, but I have do not know if the team then gets 30 sec to replace him or the substitute must report immediately. Now that I have danced around your question for two paragraphs, I would recommend that you treat Team A's request for a timeout as a timeout to keep A1 in the game. I say this is because the NFHS and NCAA are both on record as saying that this rule is to keep players in the game not keep them out of the game. MTD, Sr.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn. Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn. Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials Ohio High School Athletic Association Toledo, Ohio |
|
|||
Question #89
Mark,
Red Neck's question sounds alot like question #89 on the NFHS test. #89. The official should not grant a player's request for a time-out until after an injured player has been replaced when a substitute is available. True or False? I put False sorta based on what you were "dancing around".
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
Re: Question #89
Quote:
[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Nov 8th, 2004 at 06:32 AM] |
|
|||
Re: Re: Question #89
Quote:
I was just wondering why I would have to replace injured player A1 with a sub...before team A's time-out...when a coach may decide to use this time-out to "buy" player A1 back into the game. Are you saying the Coach must notify us prior to the time-out that he/she will be calling a time-out to keep the player in the game...thus not providing a sub for the injured/bleeding player? Also, JR, what if you have two opposing injured/bleeding players and both coaches will buy their respective players back into the game with a time-out (3-3-6 Note)...except Coach B does not decide to do this untill the end of Coach A's time-out? Could this end up being successive time-outs by opposing teams?
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
Quote:
Please note that the time-out allows the player to remain in the game. It does not allow the coach to buy the player's way back into the game. See the Note following articles 5 and 6 in 3-3. The correct procedure is to get a replacement player BEFORE granting a time-out, if the coach isn't going to try to keep that player in the game. You must ask the coach otherwise you can't know his intention. If he tries to get the injured/bleeding player ready to play by the end of the time-out, but is unable to do so, he can either take another time-out or choose to replace him at that time. If you have two opposing players in this situation you ask BOTH coaches what they intend to do. If one side elects to substitute, then you give him his 30 second replacement period first and then grant the opponents time-out. If both elect to replace or both choose to go the time-out route, then these timing periods run concurrently. Lastly, one side may take a 30 and the other a full TO. You still start them at the same time, but the team which took the 30 has to have their player ready to play in 30 seconds or else they must take another TO or substitue at the conclusion of their opponents TO. |
|
|||
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nevadaref
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by RookieDude [B][QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee [B] Quote:
[Edited by RookieDude on Nov 8th, 2004 at 08:29 AM]
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
[/B][/QUOTE] Lastly, one side may take a 30 and the other a full TO. You still start them at the same time, but the team which took the 30 has to have their player ready to play in 30 seconds or else they must take another TO or substitue at the conclusion of their opponents TO. [/B][/QUOTE] i thought if you had a full, you had to take a full timeout to buy an injured/bleeding player back in...but if you didn't have a full, then you can use a 30?? But you are correct in saying you ask both coaches there intentions before granting the timeout...if they both say yes players are staying in, they both get a time out, if one says yes the other no, then you give one team time to sub then grant the other the time out!!!
__________________
DETERMINATION ALL BUT ERASES THE THIN LINE BETWEEN THE IMPOSSIBLE AND THE POSSIBLE! |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
Bookmarks |
|
|