NFHS Rules

4 minutes left in the 1st quarter. Coach A calls a TO. Subs report during the TO. Bench informs us that one of the subs doesn't have a number in the book. We inform the coach. Sure enough, kid had changed his jersey number without coach knowing, so book had got the wrong number. We advise coach that it'll be a T to get the kid in the game. Coach decides to bench the player at this time and sends in a sub for him.

Whaddya got?

Nothing. If the kid doesn't enter the game, it's not necessary to change the book.

The kid had entered the game. Checked in properly during the TO and came out onto the floor. Only when the coach realized there was a T coming did he pulll him off the floor. We didn't T it at the time. Kid DID enter to play at the start of the 2nd quarter, along with ANOTHER kid with a bad number, and this time they were both going to stay in and play, so we started the Q with 4 FTs.

No T in the first situation for me.

Why 4 free throws? Only one per team regardless of the number of infractions?

Shouldn't it have only been one T as per 10.1.2c Penalty. One foul only per tem regardless of the number of infractions?

Should have only been 2 FT. Read, 10-1-2c & "penalty".

Rats, Junker beat me!

MJ beat me. I feel your pain. As I heard Earnhart say once (not that I'm a big racing fan)...second place is just the first loser.

If the sub only reported, it's not a T. If the sub was beckoned onto the court by an official <b>after</b> reporting, he then becomes a player and it does merit a "T".

"Reporting" and "being beckoned" are two completely different things by rule. There is no mention of the substitute being beckoned in the original post above. By strict reading of your post above, I agree with BktBallRef's original answer - no T if the sub only reported.

He was beckoned too. We gacked the free throws though. Oops. Shooter made 2 of the 4, and after those FTs, score was 19-7, but A was ahead, and won by about 35.

Why is this a violation of 10-1-2c and not a violation of 10-3-1? ;)

In this sitch, the SCORER was informed and required to change the scorebook; hence 10-1-2c. In a situation invoking 10-3-1, a player with a changed number would have already become a player when the technical foul was discovered. Harsh penalty for 10-3-1, I guess designed for a player who played under a previous number, changed numbers and reentered the game?