7th grade girls travel team, playing in the league playoffs. The other team has a fast break. Our player chases the girl with the ball, their feet get tangled and the other girl goes down hard. Our player is called for a foul (correctly) but the other player is injured and leaves the court. The ref lets the other coach bring in his best player (who happened to be on the bench) to take the 2 foul shots and she makes both. Immediately after, the "injured" girl comes back in. A few minutes later, one of my players is fouled hard and, being pretty savvy, tells the ref her wrist is hurt and she can't shoot the free throws. He tells her she's not hurt enough and makes her shoot. What should have happened in both cases? Fortunately, we won the game so it's more a case of wanting to understand than anything else.

The first case was handled exactly correctly. If a player is injured and must leave the game, then that player's coach is allowed to bring in any sub from the bench and that sub shoots the free throws. The injured player may then return to the game at the next opportunity to sub after the clock has been properly started.

The second situation is kind of hard to understand. If the player says she needs a sub, why would the official not call for a trainer, or for the coach to examine her? I can't understand why the officials would treat these two cases differently, unless it was obvious to everyone that she wasn't really hurt; maybe she didn't even fall down, or maybe she said "Oh yeah, and I'm hurt too!" (giggle, giggle, wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean, know what I mean? Say no MORE!"). Other than that, if there was any awkward contact, I think I would tend to give the player the benefit of the doubt.

If she was really so saavy, she would've winced with pain or cried or whimpered or something when he handed her the ball for the free throw. As that eminent philosopher, Ferris Beuhler, once said, "You can never go too far!"

Just my opinion.

Chuck

Play 1: The official is correct in allowing A6 to replace A1 to shoot the free throws. But A1 cannot return to game no sooner the the first dead ball stopped clock situation after the clock has started after the last free throw by A6 has ended. By your description of the play, I am not sure if that is what happened.

Play 2: It is not the official's decision to determine if B2 (the player fouled in the act of shooting by A2) is too injured to remain in the game. That is a decision to be made by B2 and her coach. B2's return to the game is subject to the same restrictions as A1 was in Play 1.

Chuck - the way I read the original post the injured player came in before any time had run off the clock. pmasonf said "Immediately after,". I agree with everything else you said.

If a player claims they are injured, that's good enough for me, unless it is such an obvious attempt to trick the officials such as the way you describe.

By immediately I meant that as soon as the second free throw hit the net, the horn blew and the first player came back in.

1st situation: Officials goofed. The first girl, the one who got hurt, can't come in until the first opportunity after the clock had properly started. This is why officila sneed to be aware of who leaves the game more than who enters. If they were aware that the first girl went out, they need to be cognizant of when she can legally come back in.

2nd situation: The official(s) should not be making any judgment as to whether a player is hurt or not. I usually ask the player if he/she can continue. If they either don't answer me or say no they're hurt, I beckon the coach and out they must go. They may not return until the first legal opportunity to do so.

That's what I thought you meant, so the officials goofed. Also remember that the team cannot "buy the player's way back into the game" with a timeout. The clock must start before that player can return to the game.

Thanks. I really appreciate the quick and concise responses.

While it is not the norm for a travel league to have substitution rules? If so, it is the only reason I could see for such a decision on his part. IMHO, he was a fool for doing so because he left himself open for liability if the child was injured. :(

I guess I tried to hedge my bet. :) I know the rule, but the description wasn't entirely clear. So I gave the officials the benefit of the doubt and then put the rule, just in case it didn't happen the way I envisioned it.

Good catch.

Chuck

That isn't savvy; faking an injury is unsporting behavior and you should have told her so.

My two cents...
Here is where the NBA has it right. If the player is too hurt to shoot the shots then they should be out of the game, and should not be allowed for that very reason.!

I don't think that's necessarily true. I've seen players who were obviously hurt, who were able to return later in the game. I've never had a kid fake an injury to get out of shooting FTs. I think we expect a little more out of a 30 year old man than we do a 13 year old kid, as far as enduring pain and continuing to play. This is a rule that's fine for the NBA but we don't need it in NF rules.