Tricky 4 In Game Situation

[JosephG678]

First, thanks to all of you that responded to my Tricky time-out situation...I now am extremely well-read in granting time-outs after reading and reviewing all the rules and cases! Here is another situation I was asked about. It is similar to a recent post about 4 players returning...

After a timeout, Team A has only four players return and officials do not recognize it. Play continues for at least a possession or two until it is noticed. Coach becomes aware but does NOT send in a sub illegally but rather has him report to the scorers table to sub at next dead ball. What is correct ruling? I thought of the following based on rules and casebook:

1) Allow play to continue until dead-ball and allow sub. Only call technical if A5 attempts to enter the game illegally during live ball
2) Upon noticing 4 in game, immediately call a technical for players not all returning to the game at approximately same time (bear in mind coach had the players return at same time -- though only 4, last player did not attempt to return after realizing he was supposed to)
3) Stop play when Team A has ball and allow sub (allow Team B to have 5 on 4, though this is not really allowed legally)

I will tell you what I told the coach and what he said happened in his game.
Thanks.
Joe

[zebraman]

Good question. Case play 10.3.3 Situation C talks about the exact scenario. In that case play, a technical foul is not called until A5 sprints onto the court during a live ball. The case doesn't make any mention that a technical should have been called prior to A5 running onto the floor.

The case plays that I recall which call a technical for "not all players returning at the same time" have always involved an advantage (for instance, A5 running off the bench to get an easy lay-up against unsuspecting Team B).

I think that #1 is the correct answer, but I will be interested to see other replies.

Z

[tjones1]

Well I know we all know this shouldn't happen. However, if it would to occur, I agree with Z, #1.

[gostars]

It can't be stressed enough that the officials need to count players before they put the ball in play. This will prevent us having to deal with to many or to few players.

[mick]

2-3 could be used if an official was really confused.

Case 3.1.1 indicates that the withdrawl of a player is not permitted, but with no penalty given.

By stretching the imagination that 10.1.9 *Delaying Returning* may be interpolated/extended to include an inadvertent shortage of participants, as well as an act of deception, other officials could affect a technical foul.

[Willful] refusal to follow the 5 player requirement (with the exception of starting the game) may be penalized by determining that intentionally disregarding R3.1.1 could be an unsporting act.

However, if we use the general 10-1-8 "Commit an unsporting foul" [because playing with less than 5 players is specifically unaddressed] and look at Case 10.1.8 Situation --> Comment:

(A Specific Unsporting Act) and use selective wording "...was the result of confusion, the entire procedure would be followed except no technical foul would be charged.",

Then, I think, we may have the intent of the rule of requiring 5 players on the floor; instead of penalizing the inadvertent act of playing less than 5 players, we simply require the participation of 5 players, much like we require one ball with sufficient air.

mick

[JosephG678]

Mick -

I'm afraid you lost me -- which is not so hard these days 10.1.8 refers to a throw-in, but I do see your analogy to "resulting from confusion." Also, I see your reference to rule 2-3, which is applicable, but it leaves open the possibility of different rulings for different officials. I am really curious to see how the officials here would respond to this situation specifically, i.e., how would you handle this scenario?
Thanks.
Joe

[Forksref]

I'd have a tough time calling a T on a team that put themselves at a disadvantage. I'd wait for the next dead ball to have them put the 5th player in the game. No T.

[mick]

Originally posted by JosephG678
Mick -

I'm afraid you lost me -- which is not so hard these days 10.1.8 refers to a throw-in, but I do see your analogy to "resulting from confusion." Also, I see your reference to rule 2-3, which is applicable, but it leaves open the possibility of different rulings for different officials. I am really curious to see how the officials here would respond to this situation specifically, i.e., how would you handle this scenario?
Thanks.
Joe

Joe,
Because there was no out-right refusal to put the 5th player on the floor, I will let them play, unpenalized, until the next dead ball. If challenged, I will respond with "I'm sorry! ...no clear rule, no clear advantage, no penalty".

If this problem occurred on my floor, it would be entirely my fault, and no one else's fault.

Seems like all I do during the game is silently count, count, count, count ....
mick

[BktBallRef]

1) Allow play to continue until dead-ball and allow sub. Only call technical if A5 attempts to enter the game illegally during live ball

[Daryl H. Long]

This problem more often than not will occur when the Resumption-of-Play procedure is put into effect.

Correct answer is # 2.

Technical foul for all player not returning at approximately the same time. 10-1-9. the ruling in case book says "once a team responds, all players must enter the court at approximately the same time." There is no need to wait for 5th player to come onto the court to assess the T.

BTW: A5 is a player in the game, not a sub therefore he can not enter the court illegally. What he is being penalized for is not returning at the same time as the other 4 players. However, the T is assessed to the team not the player.

[JosephG678]

The thing here is that all the players did respond at the same time...at least those who have returned to the court I'm glad this point was raised because it raises the point I was thinking of...the kind of dammed if do (i.e., T for only 4 players returning) or damned if you don't (i.e., illegally have A5 enter) scenario. I think the advantage/disadvantage comes to my mind here (expressed by mick). Since Team A basically put itself at a disadvantage by returning only 4 players, why assess them the T if they can hold out until a dead ball to get A5 in (i.e., turnover, foul, etc...). Interesting case here I think, maybe NFHS needs to address it specifically. In the scenario I originally posted, the coach said the official allowed action to continue until the next dead ball when Team A subbed. I told the coach I would do the same but that the official should be more aware of the number of players on floor to keep this from happening in the first place.

[Edited by JosephG678 on Feb 25th, 2005 at 01:12 AM]

[Wearin' Stripes]

Are you guys just looking for an a$$ chewing? Why would you even conside penalizing this as a failure to return technical foul. That is just being over officious. Stop play and let the kid in as soon as his team is in control. Tell everyone at the bench you screwed up. Use a little common sense and spirit of the rules here.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Wearin' Stripes
Stop play and let the kid in as soon as his team is in control. Tell everyone at the bench you screwed up.

Why would you stop play as soon as the short-handed team is in control instead of waiting for a natural whistle or TO? Why would you think of taking away the other team's legal advantage in playing 5 on 4? Imo, you're just bailing out a team that isn't smart enough to get 5 players out on the floor. That ain't our job.

Are you really gonna apologize for screwing up? I always thought that it was up to the teams to get 5 players out there, not the officials. Sure, we're supposed to check for 5, but sh*t happens. When it does, the bottom line is that it's the coach's fault that he doesn't have 5 players out there, not the officials'. Let the coach tell us that he screwed up.