Jersey number/scorebook question
 

BV, second half of a blowout game. Player from H (who is down by 30) checks in during a timeout. Table called me over and informed me that the player who just checked into the game wasn't listed in the scorebook. I call over my nearest partner and tell them what happened, that'd we'd have an admin T and be shooting free throws, etc. Before any signaling of the T or anything like that, I went over to the coach to explain to him that his player wasn't in the book. He instantly got a panicked look on his face and told me that the kid had gotten blood on his uni in the JV game and that they'd switched jersey's. We asked the kid what his number was supposed to be and he instantly replied 11. There was in fact an 11 in the book. They were down by 30 and coach was just wanting to get some JV kids in the game. We played on since the kid was obviously supposed to be number 11. We played on and both coaches were fine with that.

What would you/should we have done?

Per the rule book? Issued a Technical foul (and team foul), had V shoot 2 free throws, and have V take the ball out at halfcourt opposite the table.

If he was up by one, do you think the other coach would be OK with it? If you called a T for enforcing the rules, I don't think offending coach would have a problem with it.

When someone wants me to ignore the rules, I ask(nicely) which ones would you like me to enforce?

That said, I'd say it's your call. Clearly just a pedestrian tech and nothing more.

You may be screwed either way.
Whack him and your are overly officious.
Let is it slide and you're not following the rules.
Do what you deem will suit the game situation.

Seems you did. :)

One possible solution:

"Sorry, coach, I didn't hear you there, did you say your player had to change jerseys because of blood?" "Yeah, in the..." "That's all I needed to know, coach. We'll make the change in the book and play on."

The coach just told you a player had to change his jersey because of blood. You "missed" the part where it actually happened in the JV game. Play on.

I see really good arguments for either way, and at the end of a 30 point ballgame, it really isn't going to matter one way or the other...

Uh Oh...I can hear 'em coming.

Well, my other response is, "Coach, we've got to assess the T - as you know it's what the rules require."

Doubt that causes much of a problem either.

I'm not advocating one way or the other. Just that either way could work out fine depending on who your assignor is and how it's done in your area. My first post was just a way of attemptint to justify the "no-T" solution without blatently ignoring a rule.

I recently had a CYO game where an opposing player showed up late that wasn't on their original list submitted. The coach reported the addition and I let him know I'd have to see what the officials said. Officials decided not to whack, and that was fine.

Conversely, I had a MS game where the coach had 3 or 4 numbers entered correctly. They passed on the first discovery (not a big deal), but when the other players are discovered, they don't want to whack either. I can understand the philosophy, but they coach still has a responsibility to get the names/numbers right. The officials did somewhat begrudgingly give the subsequent violation a whack and have the coach check her lineup for any other changes that needed to be made.

One Whack Limit ???
 

Don't the rules limit this to one "whack"?

I think Stat-Man was showing that the officials decided to get the coach over there and take care of other possible mistakes so the interruptions finally end and the game can go on.

Sorry ...
 

"Never Mind"

http://re3.yt-thm-a03.yimg.com/image/25/m8/4130755237

Jurassic's wearing off on me.
 

Sounds like he wanted the kid to play and thought that the clerical error might prevent it.

Assess the T. Heck it might give some other kid a chance to get a couple of points (the other coach might pull player 12 from the bench to shoot it.)

Coach might figure out a way to ensure numbers are correct for more important games down the road. There can be just as much benefit from doing it properly as from 'overlooking'.

I've taken to enjoying the opportunities to enforce. Its good practice for me so that I'm more comfortable when they come up in more stressful situations.

Good thought.

Yes, they do. And this "whack" on the SUBSEQUENT violation could be that ONE, since they passed on the "whack" the first time around.