Substitute During Time-out
 

I am not sure if I understand the following correctly. I am sure I can rely on the folks here to check my work.

After official grants a time-out, A-1 uses inappropriate language. Official asseses a technical foul for the actions of A-1 who is...

a. ...part of the team huddle. Is the correct ruling to assess only a Player Technical foul because A-1 is a player and is not considered Bench Personnel during a time-out, as she/he would be during intermission?

b. ...part of the team huddle but, for whom, A-6 has checked into the game. Is the correct ruling to assess only a Player Technical foul because A-1 is a player because A-1 does not become Bench Personnel until substitute A-6 becomes a player by legally entering the court?

c. ...on the bench after A-6 has checked into the game to replace him and has entered the court after the expiration of the time-out but before the ball has becomes live. Is the correct ruling to assess a Bench Technical foul to A-1 and an Indirect Technical foul to the head coach because A-1 is now Bench Personnel because A-6 has legally entered the court?

Correct. Player technical. No indirect to the coach.

Correct. A1 is still a player until A6 enters the game. Player technical. No indirect to the coach.

Correct. 3-for-3! It's still early in the season, though. You'll probably screw one up eventually. ;)

Just to clarify this, is an "intermission" only the time between quarters or halves? Rule 4-34-2 says that "During an intermission, all team members are bench personnel." I always thought a timeout was considered an intermission. I guess I am incorrect.

See case book play 4.34.1. It says that players aren't bench personnel during a time-out.

WILCO. Thanks.

(This is regarding Play b. in the OP)

Does this mean that the coach could withdraw the substitution?

I picked a bad day to not bring my books with me.

I would say A6 could be withdrawn but not replaced by A1. A1 must wait until the next opportunity to substitute after the ball has been made live and the clock has been started. That is how I interpret the process.

I may be wrong, but I doubt it!

Smoke

I believe so. AR 48, pg. 66.

Think again. :)

A sub becomes a player when he legally enters the court. A player becomes a bench personnel when his sub becomes a replacement. So until A6 enters the court, A1 is still in the game.

If A6 was beckoned onto the court by an official, then A6 legally entered the court and is now a player. A1 also now becomes bench personnel. There is no prerequisite that the ball must become live before A6 becomes a player.. If A1 now yaps in the TO huddle, A1 will get a "T" and the team A head coach gets charged with an indirect "T".

NFHS rules 3-3-3. Also see the language in case book play 3.3.1SitE. In that play, subs were beckoned in and a fight broke out before the ball became live. The <b>RULING</b> says <i>"Substitites becomes players when they legally enter the court; in this case, when the official beckoned them on the court."</i>

I don't see how this AR applies -- the AR deals with "a sub for a sub", not "a withdrawn substitution"

That's kind of the crux of the situation. What if the subs are beckoned, but don't enter, or report and go back to the huddle without being beckoned?

Play: A6 reports to the table. Team A requests and is granted a TO. The official beckons A6 into the game, then reports the TO. A6 never enters the court, but goes directly to the team bench. During the TO (a) A6 curses the official; (b) A1 curses the official; (c) Coach A decides he wants A1 to remain in the game instead of entering A6. Ruling: ?

If I'm reading the case play correctly, once an official beckons the sub in, the sub has now become a player and has legally entered the court, and the player replaced becomes bench personnel. There is no requirement for the ball to become live before A6 becomes a player. Rule 3-3-2 also says that if an official beckons a player--"he/she <b>SHALL</b> enter <b>immediately</b>". If they report and aren't beckoned, they simply don't become players. Case book play 3.3.1SitC kinda covers that situation.

Play: If A6 was beckoned in, then A6 is now a player and A1 is bench personnel.
1) If A6 curses during the TO, A6 gets charged with a "T", but no indirect "T" is charged to the head coach.
2) If A1 curses during the TO, then A1 gets charged with a "T" and his head coach gets charged with an indirect "T".

If the coach wants A1 back in the game A1 must sit for 1 tick since A6 was beckoned on by the official he becomes the legal player.

What's that gotta do with the question?:confused: