Bleeding player

[jdmara]

3.3.7 SITUATION C: Officials discover blood on players A1 and B1 simultaneously and direct both players to leave the game. After notification by the officials, Team A chooses to call a time-out to keep A1 in the game, while Team B elects to substitute B6 for B1. RULING: B6 must enter the game prior to the official granting the time-out for Team A. A1 must be ready to play by the end of the time-out. B1 may not re-enter the game until the next opportunity to substitute after time has run off the clock.

I was under the impression that if either team calls timeout in this situation, both players may remain in the game following the timeout. So if both A1 and B1 were to remain in the game, both teams would have to use a timeout?

-Josh

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I was under the impression that if either team calls timeout in this situation, both players may remain in the game following the timeout. So if both A1 and B1 were to remain in the game, both teams would have to use a timeout?

-Josh

Correct.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Correct.

Guess I missed that somewhere along the lines...Maybe that was baseball where both teams didn't have to be charged a timeout

-Josh

[JS 20]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I was under the impression that if either team calls timeout in this situation, both players may remain in the game following the timeout. So if both A1 and B1 were to remain in the game, both teams would have to use a timeout?

-Josh

Rule 3-3, situation 6, see the note.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by JS 20

Rule 3-4, situation 6, see the note.

JS - Quick correction as I think you meant 3.3.6 & 7, then reference the Note beneath them.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Rufus

JS - Quick correction as I think you meant 3.3.6 & 7, then reference the Note beneath them.

I would say you're correct...I don't know how I missed that little note. I think the boss must have been bothering me when I read that rule. Darn boss is always getting in my way of proper rules study arg...

-Josh

[JS 20]

Originally Posted by Rufus

JS - Quick correction as I think you meant 3.3.6 & 7, then reference the Note beneath them.

You are correct. Same problem as jdmara. Work getting in the way!

[Adam]

Note also the timeouts will be taken concurrently rather than consecutively.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Note also the timeouts will be taken concurrently rather than consecutively.

Good point!

[BillyMac]

3.3.6 Situation C: Officials discover blood on players A1 and B1 simultaneously and direct both players to leave the game. After notification by the officials, Team A chooses to call a time-out to keep A1 in the game, while Team B elects to substitute B6 for B1. Ruling: B6 must enter the game prior to the official granting the time-out for Team A. A1 must be ready to play by the end of the time-out. B1 may not re-enter the game until the next opportunity to substitute after time has run off the clock.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Note also the timeouts will be taken concurrently rather than consecutively.

Citation please.

Also. Let's say that A1 and B1 bang heads, and start bleeding. Coaches, and trainers, are beckoned onto the court, and all come out onto the court to attend to their players. Coach A decides, in only a few seconds, to take a 60 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto A1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 60 seconds, all players on Team A, including the properly bandaged A1, are ready to play ball. Meanwhile, the coach, and trainer, from Team B take a lot more time to "check out" B1's condition, while B1, Coach A, and Trainer A, are still on the court. After a full minute passes, Coach B decides to take a 30 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto B1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 30 seconds, all players on Team B, including the properly bandaged B1, are ready to play ball.

Is this a correct scenario? If so, aren't these consecutive timeouts? I'm not sure, so again, citations please.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Citation please.

Also. Let's say that A1 and B1 bang heads, and start bleeding. Coaches, and trainers, are beckoned onto the court, and all come out onto the court to attend to their players. Coach A decides, in only a few seconds, to take a 60 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto A1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 60 seconds, all players on Team A, including the properly bandaged A1, are ready to play ball. Meanwhile, the coach, and trainer, from Team B take a lot more time to "check out" B1's condition, while B1, Coach A, and Trainer A, are still on the court. After a full minute passes, Coach B decides to take a 30 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto B1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 30 seconds, all players on Team B, including the properly bandaged B1, are ready to play ball.

Is this a correct scenario? If so, aren't these consecutive timeouts? I'm not sure, so again, citations please.

I believe that all players need to be properly attended to prior to any subs. Therefore, Team A cannot take a timeout or sub prior to to B1 being at least at the team's bench.

-Josh

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Citation please.

Also. Let's say that A1 and B1 bang heads, and start bleeding. Coaches, and trainers, are beckoned onto the court, and all come out onto the court to attend to their players. Coach A decides, in only a few seconds, to take a 60 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto A1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 60 seconds, all players on Team A, including the properly bandaged A1, are ready to play ball. Meanwhile, the coach, and trainer, from Team B take a lot more time to "check out" B1's condition, while B1, Coach A, and Trainer A, are still on the court. After a full minute passes, Coach B decides to take a 30 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto B1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 30 seconds, all players on Team B, including the properly bandaged B1, are ready to play ball.

Is this a correct scenario? If so, aren't these consecutive timeouts? I'm not sure, so again, citations please.

In the same section that dictates they run concurrently is the requirement that a full t/o must be taken to keep an injured/bleeding player in the game. There is a specific exception that allows for a 30 to be expended if no full to's are remaining. If you have a full to and you want to keep the injured player in the game, you must use it.
The scenario you described above would only be legal ONLY if Team B had no full to's
available. Play would resume at the end of the full to granted to team A.

BTW, been almost a week for you? Any DTs or other side effects of withdrawal?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by justacoach

In the same section that dictates they run concurrently is the requirement that a full t/o must be taken to keep an injured/bleeding player in the game. There is a specific exception that allows for a 30 to be expended if no full to's are remaining. If you have a full to and you want to keep the injured player in the game, you must use it.
The scenario you described above would only be legal ONLY if Team B had no full to's
available. Play would resume at the end of the full to granted to team A.

BTW, been almost a week for you? Any DTs or other side effects of withdrawal?

COMPLETE DOO-DOO!!!

The requirement to use a full time-out, if one is available, is for a coach's request regarding a correctable error. That is detailed in 5-11-3.

That article has nothing at all to do with injured/bleeding players.

When the NFHS introduced the rule to allow injured/bleeding players to remain in the game with a time-out back in 2002-03, they included a comment in the back of the book. The first sentence of that comment was: "This change permits a player who is required to leave the game for blood or injury to remain in the game if the team calls a time-out (60 or 30-second) and the situation can be corrected by the end of the time-out."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Citation please.

Also. Let's say that A1 and B1 bang heads, and start bleeding. Coaches, and trainers, are beckoned onto the court, and all come out onto the court to attend to their players. Coach A decides, in only a few seconds, to take a 60 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto A1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 60 seconds, all players on Team A, including the properly bandaged A1, are ready to play ball. Meanwhile, the coach, and trainer, from Team B take a lot more time to "check out" B1's condition, while B1, Coach A, and Trainer A, are still on the court. After a full minute passes, Coach B decides to take a 30 second time out, which is granted, to put a bandage onto B1's cut, and takes all his players to his bench area during the time out. After 30 seconds, all players on Team B, including the properly bandaged B1, are ready to play ball.

Is this a correct scenario? If so, aren't these consecutive timeouts? I'm not sure, so again, citations please.

First, I can't find the cite. Not sure where it is; maybe an NFHS interp rather than a case play? Maybe I'm wrong?

Second, the coaches both have to make their decision prior to any timeouts being granted.