Free Throw Shooter

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Tony:

Sure it does. Look at the analogy I used in my Post #4 with regard to allowing a team to change its starting lineup so that a substitute can shoot TF free throws which were the result of a TF that occurred during the officials' jurisdiction when there is less than ten minutes before the start of the game. A team is charged with a TF when it changes its starting lineup after the ten minute mark before the start of the game unless it is for an injury or illness, but any player, including an incoming substitute, can shoot TF free throws. A team has always been allowed to "change" its starting lineup without penalty to allow an incoming substitute to shoot the free throws even though the rules stated that a team could not change its starting lineup without incurring a TF for the making the change. That is a case where one rule trumps the other.

Are you going to tell Team B that it must play with only four players because B2 cannot re-enter the game until the next opportunity to substitute after the clock has started? B2 is an eligible substitute and his re-entry does not violate the reason for the existence of the re-entry rule as written in the rules.

MTD, Sr.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Tony:

Sure it does. Look at the analogy I used in my Post #4 with regard to allowing a team to change its starting lineup so that a substitute can shoot TF free throws which were the result of a TF that occurred during the officials' jurisdiction when there is less than ten minutes before the start of the game. A team is charged with a TF when it changes its starting lineup after the ten minute mark before the start of the game unless it is for an injury or illness, but any player, including an incoming substitute, can shoot TF free throws. A team has always been allowed to "change" its starting lineup without penalty to allow an incoming substitute to shoot the free throws even though the rules stated that a team could not change its starting lineup without incurring a TF for the making the change. That is a case where one rule trumps the other.

Are you going to tell Team B that it must play with only four players because B2 cannot re-enter the game until the next opportunity to substitute after the clock has started? B2 is an eligible substitute and his re-entry does not violate the reason for the existence of the re-entry rule as written in the rules.

MTD, Sr.

I don't go back as far as you, so I can't say what used to be in the rules and what didn't. But I can say that your example is not currently a case of one rule trumping another. It is a case of there being a specific exception which permits this action. If that exception were not in there, I would make one of the five named starters attempt the technical foul FTs or assess a T to the team for changing it's starting lineup in order to get someone else in there to shoot them.

Why do you keep saying that B2 is an eligible substitute when the RULES clearly state that he is NOT?
Team B must temporarily play with four just as in situation 5. Too bad for them. That's the way it goes when you show up for a game with very few team members. Just ask the Arizona State women's team.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

MTD,
Thanks for sending that play along.
Two comments:
1. I wish you have clearly stated in the scenario that the rebounding foul occurs BEFORE the clock runs.
2. I certainly hope that Mary's answer is faithful to the logic expressed in situation 5 from the 2002-03 Interps. Since the NFHS says that that player MUST leave in that situation after the coach was beckoned out and the team would continue with four since the substitution rule cannot be set aside. We must logically conclude that it is not proper to waive the requirements of the substitution rules in the situation posed by Snaqwells either. Perhaps you should have also included that citation in your email.

Item (1): Yikes, you are correct. We all knew what we were chatting about, but will Mary understand? That is the $64,000 question.

And as we speak, Mary returned my email with a ruling based upon the fact the the clock had started before A1's foul. ROFLMAO!! She also didn't like that I went directly to her rather than go through the OhioHSAA office, meaning it could take weeks if not months to get an answer. So I responded again requesting an interpretation because she is the final authority on the matter not a StateHSAA and that I am a member of NFOA and that should entitle me to request interpretations directly from her. Nothing like making the boss angry. ROFLMAO!!

Just another fun day in the DeNucci Family household.

MTD, Sr.

[Nevadaref]

Why don't you just email her the link to this thread and ask her to read it?

She could then send something out to the heads of all state associations.

PS She was probably ticked because without the specification that the foul occurred PRIOR to the clock starting, she likely felt that you were bothering her with a trivial play.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Of course, that probably means Mary will rule the opposite.

She hasn't failed us yet, has she?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I have no idea what Mary will say but the situation is simply not covered in the rule book.

Agree.

[Johnny Ringo]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

So, there is no circumstance where a player on the floor can shoot even if there are enough subs? I thought this was on the NFHS test a few years back.

Am I correct that the above (underlined) quote is correct?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

Am I correct that the above (underlined) quote is correct?

If there is an eligible sub, he/she is the only person who can shoot for the injured player.

The only time any player on the court may shoot free throws is for a technical foul or, as noted in this thread, when there isn't an eligible sub for an injured player.

[Johnny Ringo]

Can a player not on the floor (one of the five) shoot free throws that resulted in a technical foul. Can he sub in at the time of thechnical? is that permissable?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

Can a player not on the floor (one of the five) shoot free throws that resulted in a technical foul. Can he sub in at the time of thechnical? is that permissable?

Yes.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why don't you just email her the link to this thread and ask her to read it?

She could then send something out to the heads of all state associations.

PS She was probably ticked because without the specification that the foul occurred PRIOR to the clock starting, she likely felt that you were bothering her with a trivial play.

Well she did say that the ruling was very simple one, but when I replied to her email stating that I was not as clear as I should have been in describing the play and clarified the the game clock situation she refused to answer any further emails from me. Of course her attitude about me sending my play to my State Interpreter instead of her go my dander up and I told her that as the Rules Editor she is the final word on all rules interpretation and that as a member of NFOA I had a right to request an interpretation directly from her probably added fuel to the fire.

None-the-less, I have posted the play on the NFHS Basketball Discussion Forum. The URL for the thread is:

http://www.nfhs.org/cgi-bin/ultimate...&f=11&t=001669

I hope that people will read the thread and and post their opinions; Then after a sufficient number of posts have been made one of us could then email her and request that she read the thread and give us an official NFHS interpretation.

MTD, Sr.

P.S. When the time comes to send Mary an email if anyone needs her email just email me at DeNucciBASKETBALL (at) Hotmail (dot) com, and I will email it to you.

[Johnny Ringo]

Situation: Tech on Team B ... can anyone on Team A shoot the Tech - including a player who was not on the floor and was on the bench?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

Situation: Tech on Team B ... can anyone on Team A shoot the Tech - including a player who was not on the floor and was on the bench?

Johnny:

The answer to your question is yes.

MTD, Sr.

[Johnny Ringo]

Thanks .... any player in the book (on the floor or bench) can shoot free throws that resulted in a technical foul, however only the sub (or playing checking in for an injured player) can shoot free throws that were supposed to goto the injured player ---- thanks!

[BoomerSooner]

I don't have my books, but my thinking is that any player that is not already in the game, DQ'ed, or ejected is an eligible substitute. I don't think there is any wording that declares that a replaced player is an "ineligible substitute", but rather there are restrictions on when s/he can reenter. In this case the restriction is after the clock has started.

If this logic is acceptable, then the wording of rule in question says that any eligible substitute my take an injured players free-throws. The use of the word any implies an exception ot the previous restriction.

Essentially my reasoning is that while the the rule allowing the substitute to shoot the FT's is providing permission for any eligible substitute to enter given the sitution of an injury. Ultimately it is my belief that given that the rule specifically addresses a specific situation (what to do with an injured player's FT's) and gives a direct solution to said situation with the permissive phrase of "any eligible sub", the specific situation ruling should take precedence over the general restriction on re-entering a replaced player. It's similar to telling your kids not to go outside after dark (general rule), but that if there is a fire they should go outside immediately (specific situation).

This is just my opinion and since I'm away from my rule book, I don't have the exact wording of the rule, I reserve the right to change my opinion. In the end it will come down to the exact definition of "eligible substitute".