Are these two questions similar in how they are to be handled or can the time out be granted before the kid is removed in 89? Dont know why this one is kicking my butt!
Any help would be appreciated.

Different questions testing different rules.

#88- see rule 5-8-3(b)

#89- see rule 3-4-15

Thanks Jurassic 5 8 3b is what I was looking for.

JR...we talked about #89 last night at our association meeting.

3-4-15 states ...a player not conforming to this uniform policy shall be directed to leave the game.

Where does it say anything about a subsequent TO?

Some stated a coach can't buy a player back into the game with a TO...but, what rule reference would we use?

Dude, the correct exam answer, according to the answer key, is False. Iow, you can't keep the player in the game after he's been directed to leave by burning a TO. To justify it, just use R3-3-4--"A player who has been replaced,<b>or directed to leave the game</b>, shall <b>not</b> re-enter before the next opportunity to substitute <b>after the clock has started properly following his/her replacement</b>". That's pretty straightforward-- no clock started, no coming back in.

The question is definitely False. JR gave you the proper rules citation to back this up, 3-3-4.

Please don't confuse uniform violations with the blood/injury exceptions listed in 3-3-5, and 3-3-6.
A team may elect to take a TO to keep an injured or bleeding player in the game, if they can fix him up during the TO, however, it is not permissible to take a TO to allow a player directed to leave the game because of a uniform violation to remain in the contest.

Since there isn't a TO exception for uniform violations in the rules, the question is false.

Excellent JR...that's exactly what we were looking for(3-3-4)that's what makes question #89 False...thanks!