Free Throw Shooter

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Yes, SITUATION can be applied to Snaqwells play, but if the injured player cannot play even after the charged timeout, then I would stand by my decision to let B2 return to the game even though the clock had not been started since the time he was removed from the game. I admit that Snaqwells play is very remote and I have never had such a situation occur (knock on my head right now) in my 37 years of officiating, but you never know.

MTD, Sr.

That's because you're getting soft in your old age.

(Said in the nicest possible way, of course. )

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I just emailed Mary Struckhoff the following letter:


PLAY: A1 is fouled and will be shooting two shots. After A1’s first free throw attempt, B6 (Team B’s only remaining eligible substitute) replaces B2. A1’s second free throw attempt is unsuccessful. During the rebound action for A1’s missed second free throw attempt A1 pushes B3 in the back causing B3 to roll an ankle. Team B is in the bonus. B3 is unable to immediately continue playing. Team B requests and is granted a timeout in order to allow B3 to recover from the ankle injury so as to remain in the game. B3 is still not able to play after the timeout has ended.



QUESTION: Can B2 return to the game to replace B3 and shoot B3’s free throw attempts? Or must B2 remain out of the game until the first opportunity for Team B to substitute after the clock has started and instead one of the four Team B players on the court at the time of B3’s injury shoot his free throws?

MTD, Sr.

[bob jenkins]

I'll side with Nevada on this one.

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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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?