Well I have had about 25 varsity contests at this point of the year. Boys and Girls both and I have to say, I WAS WRONG ABOUT THE EXPERIMENTAL RULE!!!!

For those that are not familiar, I live in Illinois which volunteered to use an experimental rule for this year. It basically was for any player that was disqualified with 5 fouls or any other reason during the game. Instead of giving a coach 30 seconds, they must substitute the player IMMEDIATELY!!! I at first thought this was asinine to make us do this. I thought that all this would do was cause conflict and confrontation because you had to request a sub as soon as you found out. I was absolutely wrong. I have had no problems at all. I have had several kids foul out, and not one problem. As a matter of fact, I have usually had the sub at the table before I can tell the coach. And had to ask the coach, "is this the sub for the fouled out player?" I have had nothing but good feelings about this rule. It makes the game move faster and it lessens the games coaches would play when a kid fouled out. No more short pep-talk to the players for the duration of the 30 seconds. No more staring sessions with the coach wishing ill-will on you after fouling out the star. I think the experiment has done exactly what they intended. Avoid confrontation.

I surely hope that they will keep this rule and change it across the board. It really does make things easier and lessens the conflict. I think the NF Rules Committee got this one correct.

And thoughts?

Peace

Wow, Rut, My respect for you has increased 100% because you are willing to admit you were wrong! Not a lot of people can pull this off.

About the rule, I have to admit I had agreed with you in the past and I am surprised that it seems to be working out. Have you heard any comments from coaches or AD's about the rule? If, in practice this rule improves the game, I'm all for it and hope they spread it out over the whole country next year.

Wish we had this...I had a coach that used about 99.9999% of her 30 seconds last week. Drove me nuts, and if it wasn't under minute in a 40 point game I might have dropped one one her. I don't care if you chat, but she turned it into a "bonus" 30, that sucks.

Just let me clear my throat here...ahem...ahem...cough...
cough. OK, I'm ready:

I told you so. :D

Thanks for the update, I'm glad it's working out.

Sounds like a good change to me. I did a game a few years back where a coach really abused the 30 seconds. my partner called the 5th foul on a player but failed to notify the coach or player of the disqualification. We waited and waited for the sub. Finally my partner asked about the sub and the coach said that he wasn't notified of the DQ. We had to give him the full 30 seconds to replace the player. Wow, a coach who knows the rules.

No - a coach who knows one rule. And - it's one that lets him act like an @ss, of course.

WHOA there!! You can't give a technical foul to a coach who is following the rules! This rule might suck, and it might give an advantage to the team which just fouled, but it is still a rule. The front of the rulebook states that a team should not be given an advantage NOT intended by rule - this rule clearly gives the team a LEGAL advantage for which no penalty should be issued.

I, like Dan, believed this would be a good change. My belief stemmed from personal experience in which I (incorrectly) applied the "new" rule in MA!!

Chuck

I believe Brain is saying the she was close enough to going over 30 seconds that he could have stuck her and no one would have known the difference.

Technically, she was over but the timer "forgot" to tell me time expired.

That is my story and I am sticking to it.

Now if she had played dumb and said something like, i didn't know that was 5....it would have ended differently.

I agree with you on this one. Sounds like a good change!
Pistol