T or not a T ?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 10.1.6(b) is clear.

I guess I'm not sure that this case play applies. It was brought to their attention after the game had ended in that situation.

This seems to me to be a different situation, as 6 players are noticed during a dead ball. If you noticed the 6 players after a violation and before beginning the subsequent throw-in, would you not call the technical foul? I'm sure you would, but want a rationale for treating these situations differently.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

This seems to me to be a different situation, as 6 players are noticed during a dead ball. If you noticed the 6 players after a violation and before beginning the subsequent throw-in, would you not call the technical foul? I'm sure you would, but want a rationale for treating these situations differently.

Don't be so sure. I wouldn't. They weren't participating when I noticed it. Now they aren't going to participate until the 6th player is sitting on the bench.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Don't be so sure. I wouldn't. They weren't participating when I noticed it. Now they aren't going to participate until the 6th player is sitting on the bench.

Are you sure they aren't participating? I'm looking through my Rules Book right now and can't find a definition of "participating." Doesn't mean it isn't there, but I'd have a hard time not penalizing six players on the court when I noticed it after I called a travel and it was obvious they were playing with six before I called it.

Edit to add: If this was only to be penalized during a live ball, it should say so.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I guess I'm not sure that this case play applies. It was brought to their attention after the game had ended in that situation.

This seems to me to be a different situation, as 6 players are noticed during a dead ball. If you noticed the 6 players after a violation and before beginning the subsequent throw-in, would you not call the technical foul? I'm sure you would, but want a rationale for treating these situations differently.

Before the subsequent throw-in?

1) Before ball is at disposal of thrower-in I would employ the famous "preventive officiating" and hold up play until 6th person leaves the court. (Something I did last week)

or

2) If ball is at disposal of thrower-in then the ball is live and you penalize accordingly.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

1) Before ball is at disposal of thrower-in I would employ the famous "preventive officiating" and hold up play until 6th person leaves the court. (Something I did last week).

Even if the 6th player had been on the court during the live ball preceding the violation? I'm not talking about during a substitution process, and then you count and realize there are 6 out there and you wait until a player leaves, I'm talking about a situation where there has been 6 on the court, you blow a travel, everyone heads the other way and then as you get ready to administer the throw-in you realize that A has (and has had) 6 players on the court.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I guess I'm not sure that this case play applies. It was brought to their attention after the game had ended in that situation.

This seems to me to be a different situation, as 6 players are noticed during a dead ball. If you noticed the 6 players after a violation and before beginning the subsequent throw-in, would you not call the technical foul? I'm sure you would, but want a rationale for treating these situations differently.

Um, no I wouldn't. You have to notice 6 players participating during a live ball. They're not violating any rule until the ball becomes live.

If you look at part(a) of that case play, it says that you can penalize the team after the ball becomes dead if you had knowledge that 6 players were actually participating at the same time. In the original post, it was stated that the officials were not aware that the team had 6 players participating until after the ball became dead. Without having previous knowledge that 6 players were participating, you can't retroactively penalize that team. That's what part (b) of that case play is telling us.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Um, no I wouldn't. You have to notice 6 players participating during a live ball. They're not violating any rule until the ball becomes live.

If you look at part(a) of that case play, it says that you can penalize the team after the ball becomes dead if you had knowledge that 6 players were actually participating at the same time. In the original post, it was stated that the officials were not aware that the team had 6 players participating until after the ball became dead. Without having previous knowledge that 6 players were participating, you can't retroactively penalize that team. That's what part (b) of that case play is telling us.

I apologize for assuming. I just don't see that the case play applies. It involves the end of a game, not a dead ball during a game.

I'm more than open to being convinced, but I haven't been yet. I simply don't see not penalizing A when the rule does not explicitly state "during a live ball".

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I simply don't see not penalizing A when the rule does not explicitly state "during a live ball".

Cool. Find a rule that states it's illegal to have 6 players on the court during a dead ball.

If they'd wanted a mandatory "T", they would have used the language "Penalized when discovered", as they do in other rules.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Cool. Find a rule that states it's illegal to have 6 players on the court during a dead ball.

If they'd wanted a mandatory "T", they would have used the language "Penalized when discovered", as they do in other rules.

Would you call a flagrant technical foul on a player who changed his/her number without reporting it to the scorer and an official if you discovered it during a dead ball? It has the exact same language.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Would you call a flagrant technical foul on a player who changed his/her number without reporting it to the scorer and an official if you discovered it during a dead ball? It has the exact same language.

No, I sureasheck wouldn't call a "T". Why? Because the player is no longer participating.

It uses the exact same language as 6 players participating does. You have to discover it while the player is participating, exactly like it says in both 10-1-6 and 10-3-1. If you didn't discover it while the player was participating, it's too late when the ball becomes dead and the player is no longer participating.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

No, I sureasheck wouldn't call a "T". Why? Because the player is no longer participating.

It uses the exact same language as 6 players participating does. You have to discover it while the player is participating, exactly like it says in both 10-1-6 and 10-3-1. If you didn't discover it while the player was participating, it's too late when the ball becomes dead and the player is no longer participating.

JR, I really appreciate all your insight, but you've yet to answer the critical question - what is the definition of participating? Players don't become bench personnel at each dead ball. They are still players. That indicates to me they are "participating" unless someone can provide me a definition that states that participating only applies to live balls.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Cool. Find a rule that states it's illegal to have 6 players on the court during a dead ball.

If they'd wanted a mandatory "T", they would have used the language "Penalized when discovered", as they do in other rules.

There is obviously no rule that it's illegal to have 6 players on the court at any time during a dead ball. There's also no rule stating it's permissible to have more than 5 on the court during a dead ball. Is it okay for every bench player to step onto the court during the interval between a violation and the subsequent throw-in?

Again, I'm waiting for the definition of "participating." It's what this whole discussion revolves around.

[Texas Aggie]

I only have the '05 and '06 casebook handy, but if the play sitch is the same, the only reason the ruling was no T was the fact that time had run out. Just because the clock is stopped and they aren't playing doesn't mean you don't have an infraction going on then -- per the rule, just like you wouldn't ignore the infraction if you didn't realize the 6 were on the court until you called a foul or violation for other reasons. You still have the same deal: 6 on the floor (even if leaving) during a dead ball.

I do, however, think (or at least the case can be made that) the casebook play applies to end of quarter situations -- not just end of game. But I don't think it applies to time out situations like clock stoppages and called TOs. The rule doesn't say that and neither does the case play. Don't read more into the case play or ruling then what is there. We have to assume the committee was aware of different situations and made the ruling based on this one.

[Texas Aggie]

6 players participating during a live ball

I don't have the rule book handy, so I'll ask: does the rule use that language? If not, where are you getting that interp from?

[jdw3018]

Yes, the rule is just as I typed it in post #2.