Illegal Substitution
 

We had a long discussion on this at our last association meeting. A1 is at the line shooting free throws. B1 comes to the table to report and comes out on the court without being beckoned by the official. In this case the T (three person mechanics) is responsible for beckoning (IAW our state manual) and is right by the table. He did not see the player coming to the table so could not stop him. Anyway, Coach of A starts telling the T he MUST call a technical for an illegal substitution. The T, new to our association but not as an official, calls the T for the illegal sub. Many of our officials did not agree that this was the correct call. Many of our veterans said that we must enforce good game management and not let this happen. Also, if it happens we should not call a T just because a coach tells us to. Most thought he was testing an official new to the area. Options discussed were to just ignore the coach and tell B2 to get back to the table, blame it on the clock operator or scorekkeper and tell the sub to come back, just tell the coach no T and fix the problem or go and talk to the C (about anything at all) and then come back and tell the coach the C beckoned him in so it is legal. What does folks here say? I am in agreement with our veterans that we should do all we can to avoid these kinds of situations but once it happens and the coach clearly is correct in telling you how to interperet the ruling, what do you do? This was in a close game and the T did change the flow of the game.

I would not assess the T, especially if this was the first time in the game that there was a problem like this. It's easy to fix - "Son, go back to the table and wait til the first FT is shot and I beckon you into the game"...

The T is not always the best resolution to problems. As for the complaining coach, I'd say - "Coach, I've got two choices here: penalize for an infraction that has no impact on the game, or do the right thing and send him back to the table. I'm going to do the right thing. You may not like it now, but you definitely would if the shoe were on the other foot."

Others may disagree, but that's how I'd handle it.

Thats why its always good to have a pregame with the table and make sure they understand "not" to let any subs in until an official tells them to come on the court. Now, if the person just ran off the bench and onto the court, then I would possibly look at other options! Some body, whether its the C or T should have seen that kid on his way to the table and then the button hook into the game.

The wording in the book says, "Penalized if discovered before the ball becomes live."

This is one of those situations where a lot of judgment is needed. Lots of refs will let this go unless it gets to be a problem during that game, but it is technically agains the rules. You as the ref need to keep a lot of different things in mind, such as what the generally accepted procedures are in your area, and how other refs in your association or group will handle this. YOu don't want to be the only one who enforces it, and you don't want to be the only one who lets it go. There's not one right answer for every situation, even though the rule is absolute.

The coach is clearly right. The Trail handled it correctly. This is a plainly written rule and there is no reason that it shouldn't be enforced. At the HS level, the players and coaches are expected to know this.

RULE 10, SECTION 2 SUBSTITUTE TECHNICAL
A substitute shall not enter the court:
ART. 1 . . . Without reporting to the scorer.
ART. 2 . . . Without being beckoned by an official, except between quarters.
PENALTY: (Section 2) Two free throws plus ball for division-line throw-in. One foul for either or both requirements. Penalized if discovered before the ball becomes live.
NOTE: A single flagrant technical foul or the second technical foul charged to a substitute results in disqualification of the offender to the team bench.

If you want to be a rulebook official, go ahead and call that. If you want to use good common sense, get the player to go back to the table if this is an honest mistake. Kids do silly things and the kid might have been nervous. I could call a T every single game if I really wanted to for this infraction. Unless the kid ran all the way across the court, do not call a T for this.

Peace

JRut, Thanks. I like this. I would not call a T here and will be more aware of it in the future.

Plus, most kids think the horn is the signal to go in. But you're right -- sometimes they just lose their brain and do something silly.

Very true!

If you want to be known as a referee who doesn't enforce the rules properly, then don't make that call. If you want to follow your own personal philosophy and think that you know better then the members of the NFHS committee then send the kid back to the table and do nothing about it. Rules enforcement is only POE #5 this season.

I do not understand why we must use the letter of the law in this case, but in the thread of timeouts, there is all talk about using common sense. I guess some people like to pick and choose when they want to "know the rules" and other times when they want to apply a common sense method. I guess the POE does not cover that scenario. :D

Peace

I guess Kurt what's-his-name says to send the kid back to the table. :p

I guess my first question is how did a sub come into the game during a free throw without any of the crew of 3 noticing it? :confused: I always have a hard time justifying a penalty to a player or a team when an entire crew falls asleep (though sometimes a crew has no choice like when they allow 6 players to be in the game for one team and the ball becomes live).

In this case, if the free thrower didn't already have the ball, I would just make the kid go back and report in.

If the free thrower already had the ball, then it might be a situation where we don't have a choice.

I am sure that Kurt would say to use common sense in this scenario and to rule with the spirit of the rule. If the kid puts one foot (or even both feet) on the court and then goes back, let it go.

If the kid goes all the way to the FT line and taps the player he is replacing on the shoulder, then issue a T.

If the ball is dead, get it fixed. If the ball is live, issue a T.

etc.

And, yes, there's judgment involved (what about 2 steps, 3 steps, 4 steps, etc. onto the floor). Deal with it.

Rut, since you are an experienced football official allow me ask you a serious question that relates to this thread.

Would you have called the offside penalty against the player from Louisville on the FG attempt by Rutgers at the end of that game?

I hope that you saw the play, but if not here's the gist of it.
The player clearly crossed the line of scrimmage prior to the snap of the ball, but he didn't touch anyone, nor did he continue to rush. He stopped and actually backed up as the offense snapped the ball and took the kick, which they missed. Did he affect the play?

I had a very similar play happen to me in a juco game, where before a throw-in, the C waved in a couple of subs, lost track of how many went off, and pointed to the T to administer the throw-in. The throw-in occured with no pressure, when on the other end of the court, one of the players realized they wern't supposed to be on the floor, and ran off. We stopped play, made sure we were finally correct, and re-started. Afterwards, our supervisor told us we handled it correctly. Of course, it would've been better if that damn C would've counted correctly before letting the throw-in happen :o, but since it was the crew's fault, common sense was the phrase he used in agreeing we get it fixed, and get the ball back in play as soon as possible without issuing a penalty.

How does that mesh with the philosophy espoused here?

9.2.5 SITUATION: Thrower A1 inadvertently steps through the plane of the boundary line and touches the court inbounds. A1 immediately steps back into normal out-of-bounds throw-in position. The contact with the court was during a situation: (a) with; or (b) without defensive pressure on the throw-in team. RULING: A violation in both (a) and (b). COMMENT: Whether or not there was defensive pressure or whether or not stepping on the court was inadvertent, it is a violation and no judgment is required in making the call.

BTW the NCAA says the same and even issued a bulletin a couple of years ago specifying this point.

Let me first clarify my football experience. I do not work college football (at least not varsity game) at this point of my career. I have worked many JV games this year because our area is soon going to 7 man for many college games and there are evaluating officials for the future. I have not been in a position very often to rule on such a call in a actual game.

Secondly, I definitely would have called an offside penalty in the play you described (The play would have been shut down in NF Rules by rule). I saw the play live and I called this penalty before the penalty was announced or before ESPN let you know in their graphic that there was a flag. Not only was it obvious, it was the expected call and the very common call in the game of football. Calling offside and false start penalties are some of the easiest calls in the game of football to make because everyone sees them. Offside penalties in football are not any different than a FT shooter clearly stepping into the lane before shooting the ball. It is obvious to everyone and not a close call.

I really do not know what you are trying to imply with this question (but I will play along). In my opinion of what a T is in basketball is much more similar to an unsportsmanlike penalty/personal foul in football. If we can prevent these being called we do everything in our power to do so as football officials. If we are put into a situation where everyone sees the infraction or everyone knows what the common call is, then you apply the rules accordingly. This is a fine line, but this is why you see the rookie apply the rule differently than the long time veteran. Why, because we could literally call this every single game at some time. I think Bob summarized my philosophy to a tee (and what other officials do where I live). I also work some college and calling a T for this would get me and others fired for not preventing a very preventable situation.

Peace

Seems apples and petunias, but admittedly I'm getting old.

So is what you're espousing that if your partner waves a sub for team A in, and as sub approaches team member he's replacing, you brain-fade and administer the throw in-your remedy for your mistake is call a T on A for 6 players on the floor?

My point with the Louisville/Rutgers play and Case Book play 9.2.5 is that we are discussing a player clearly stepping over a line, but his action isn't really affecting gameplay. There is a rule against this in all of the situations.
Should a call be made by an official?
Some are advocating calling it, some are not.

It seems that both the NCAA and the NFHS want it called whether there is an advantage gained or not, and it seems that most officials are going to call it when it is obvious.

I'm not sure our two plays are equal (I prefer apples and bowling balls), but I see what you're trying to get at.

My point is my supervisor considered how we handled our play correct. I didn't know that until after the fact. He has also said many times if we apply the rules, he has no problem backing us up. Which, obviously, is a slight contradiction because there were 6 players on the floor, and we discovered it, so we could have, by rule, issued the T. So, at least in this specific instance with this specific supervisor, "common sense" trumps "strict rules interpretation". Do all supervisors feel this way? Probably not. Can I use what I feel is common sense instead of strict rules interpretation all the time? Absolutely not. So where is that line drawn? I'm still trying to figure it out.

Excellent post. That is the problem whenever we talk about common sense. What some feel is common sense, others will not. (JR has even advocated on this forum that following a plainly written rule is common sense! :eek: )

What one supervisor believes is the right thing to do, another will say was clearly incorrect.

All I can tell you is that is the human factor in sports. Strange stuff happens, decisions are made by people and that makes the game worth watching. Otherwise a computer could always tell us who would win. What would be the fun of that?

You are trying to apply a philosophy in one sport to another situation in another sport that has little or no relation. You could easily say that the offsides that was called not only was obvious but maybe affected the kicker in rushing his attempt. Maybe the blocker would be affected because they would have to adjust their blocking to a break away defender. You must have never played football if you think this had no influence on the play. I think you should stick to soccer. :rolleyes:

Peace

And, for the most part, he would be right. ;)

Altered quote! Not really Rut's words. Done by me to make a point.
Seems like you couldn't easily say anything. :eek:

BTW I saw a few sports reporters on TV who said that he had no bearing on the play, but they all agreed that he was offside and that it was a penalty.

Nevada,

If I have said this before I will say this again. There are a reason why certain officials are considered for the big games and the playoff assignments year in and year out. There is also a reason why some officials will never get a chance. If calling a T on a player that just put a foot onto the floor (by rule this is an automatic T), then go right ahead. I am very confident that this is what people where I live want and will not get the least bit upset if I do not give a T for this action. Considering I have seen some officials much more experienced than I am and have worked multiple state finals and work higher college levels than I currently do. I feel confident in my philosophy of this.

Peace