Book Problem - NF Rule 3.2.2

[Larks]

Start of the 2nd Q, I report a foul on Vis 20. Home scorer waves me over and says 20 played in the 1st qtr as well as all 4 qtrs in the JV game. Ohio has a 5 Qtrs rule. As they start milling around for the JV book, the visitor scorer tells me that he recorded the wrong name in the book which created the misunderstanding about 20's qtrs and that 20 currently playing didnt play JV and is a regular for the varsity.

In other words, the visiting scorer accidentally wrote in "Jones" who doesnt play varsity and wears 20 when he should wrote in "Smith" who does play Varsity and wears 20.

=======================
Rule 3.2.2

SECTION 2 ROSTERS, STARTERS, NUMBERS
ART. 2 . . . After the 10-minute time limit specified in Article 1, a team is charged with a maximum of one technical foul regardless of how many infractions of the following are committed (see 10-1-2 Penalty):

a. Changing a designated starter, unless necessitated by illness, injury, illegal equipment or apparel, etc., or to attempt a technical-foul free throw.
b. Adding a name to the team member list.
c. Requiring the scorer to change a team member's or player's number in the scorebook.
d. Requiring a player to change to the number in the scorebook.
e. Having identical numbers on team members and/or players.
=======================

There were not two number 20s in the book or dressed.
There was not a number change required.

The question is this: Would you interpret 3.2.2 B to be the guideline here and therefore assessed a technical foul in order to change the name?

We huddled and as a group felt like there was no advantage gained nor any book problems created by this situation because we had all the numbers right. An argument could be that this is stretching the intent of 3.2 and a technical was not merited. We all 3 agreed to instruct the scorers to correct the name without penalty.

We all felt that what we did was fair but did we set the rule aside? I look at 3.2.2 B and think that we didnt "ADD" a name but rather correct an honest mistake.

As a backdrop to this situation is that this was an Indiana school playing an Ohio School - they are only ten miles apart and huge rivals. This game is the biggest game on the schedule for both schools so the intensity levels were very high.

What would you have done in this situation?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Larks
Rule 3.2.2b.-Adding a name to the team member list.

The question is this: Would you interpret 3.2.2 B to be the guideline here and therefore assessed a technical foul in order to change the name?

We all felt that what we did was fair but did we set the rule aside? I look at 3.2.2 B and think that we didnt "ADD" a name but rather correct an honest mistake.

As a backdrop to this situation is that this was an Indiana school playing an Ohio School - they are only ten miles apart and huge rivals. This game is the biggest game on the schedule for both schools so the intensity levels were very high.

What would you have done in this situation?

Rule 10-1-1-"A team shall not fail to supply the scorer with the name and number of each teammember who may participate...".
PENALTY:One foul...Penalized when it occurs."

It's an automatic team technical foul. The visiting team didn't supply the scorer with the name of a teammember who might participate.

What would I have done? Probably the same as you in an exhibition game. In a league or playoff game, you call it.

[Nevadaref]

I can see the two cases.
1. The team failed to supply the NAME Smith and that is required. Therefore, you now need to ADD "Smith #20" to the book and remove "Jones #20" from the book. Agree with JR's ruling that by the book this is a T.


2. What gives me pause is that the scorer needs to transfer all of the stats for Jones to Smith. That makes me believe that we have been recording the correct information for the correct numbered player all alone, we simply have misnamed him. It would certainly be more expedient for the scorer to just CHANGE the name from Jones to Smith instead of starting a whole new line in the book. If this was caught just prior to the opening jump however this wouldn't be the case and it would be clear that the focus is on the name being wrong.


In the end, I can't get past the fact that the team didn't supply the name Smith in the beginning and the rules are quite clear in stating that this is required. The opposing coach could look at the book and think, "Hey Smith isn't playing today, maybe he's sick or injured." The coach then adjusts his defensive assignments. That is why this is a problem. It could well be misleading to the opponents and that would be considered unsporting. But is it really unsporting even if it was unintentional? For the sake of consistency, I think that we have to say yeah. Otherwise, teams could get away with all kinds of stuff by claiming that it was unintentional. The officials can't be expected to be mindreaders. So my ruling is that they definitely broke a clear rule and should be penalized by a team T and the book should be corrected.

Would I charge the T? Absolutely. This is one of the tough decisions that referees are there to handle. I believe that the rules which both teams agreed to abide by have to be enforced in order to have a fair contest.

[rainmaker]

We're not even supposed to deal with the 5 quarter rule, so I'm not sure that is any of our business. If they wanted to change the name to make sure the game didn't get forfeited, then yea, there's a T. Otherwise, I ignore the names, frankly. I know that's not according to Hoyle, but I've got more important things to worry about and I haven't mastered the "keeping track of all the details" thing yet.