Free Throw Shooter

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

3.2 SITUATION B: A1, who is designated as a starter 10 minutes prior to the scheduled starting time of the game, becomes ill or is injured before the game starts.

RULING: A1 may be replaced without penalty as illness or injury is considered to be an extenuating and unavoidable situation which permits a substitution.


This is as least as relevant as the above mentioned 3.3.3.

Are there eligible substitutes available to take A1's place in the starting line-up? If so, then there is no problem. The situation doesn't pose a conflict between playing with five and bringing in a team member who is NOT eligible. It simply allows someone who is eligible to enter.

All that your play ruling tells us is that a substitution is permissible for an ill or injured starter when there is an eligible substitute available. That's not shocking. That doesn't help resolve any issues.

Now what do you do if there aren't any eligible substitutes around? That would be a relevant play ruling. BTW I believe that you can't start the game.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Are there eligible substitutes available to take A1's place in the starting line-up? If so, then there is no problem. The situation doesn't pose a conflict between playing with five and bringing in a team member who is NOT eligible. It simply allows someone who is eligible to enter.

All that your play ruling tells us is that a substitution is permissible for an ill or injured starter when there is an eligible substitute available. That's not shocking. That doesn't help resolve any issues.

Now what do you do if there aren't any eligible substitutes around? That would be a relevant play ruling. BTW I believe that you can't start the game.

The whole point is the philosophy presented in this play...that a subsequent injury makes a substitution legal that was not legal prior to the injury.

[Y2Koach]

Just make sure that whatever you guys decide, call it both ways.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Y2Koach

Just make sure that whatever you guys decide, call it both ways.

...and consistently.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The whole point is the philosophy presented in this play...

Oh, so now you are willing to look at the philosophy and principle presented in the play ruling, but you aren't willing to consider those points from the play rulings that I cited. Very fair-minded of you.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Oh, so now you are willing to look at the philosophy and principle presented in the play ruling, but you aren't willing to consider those points from the play rulings that I cited. Very fair-minded of you.

Hardly. One is directly and explicitly commenting on the principle/philosophy of the ruling and the other is a situation that merely a has some elements in common....and you're adding your philosophy to it. Try again.