What's the penalty

[tjchamp]

Substitute enters the court without being beckoned, not between quarters, before ball becomes live and technical foul is called. Maybe not great game management but let's say it happened. I understand the T would be charged to the sub. Should there be an indirect to the coach? You don't become a "player" until beckoned. Everyone else is bench personnel.

[Adam]

No T to the coach, just the sub. Read the Technical Foul Penalty Summary page at the back of the rule book.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No T to the coach, just the sub. Read the Technical Foul Penalty Summary page at the back of the rule book.

I don't think this is correct. The table states that Technicals for bench personal (in this case entering the court without permission) is charged to the substitute/bench personnel and is an indirect on the coach.

The reason this one is on my mind is that it happened to my partner and I in a JV game last week. Two subs waiting to enter, we beckon them on to the court and, as I'm handing the ball for the throw in, see a player rush to the table. By this time the ball is inbounded and on its way down the court so I figure we'll get the sub on the next stopage. Well, the sub comes onto the court and the guy he's replacing is runs to the bench. We call the T and, luckily, my partner reminds me that it's an indirect to the coach who gets to sit for the rest of the game.

[Adam]

I'm just asking, but did you read the table?

The table has a separate row for substitutes entering without reporting or without being beckoned. Direct to the player, counts towards his T and total foul counts (as well as the team foul count), but no direct or indirect is charged to the head coach. You sat the coach unnecessarily and saddled him with two unearned and undeserved indirect Ts.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm just asking, but did you read the table?

The table has a separate row for substitutes entering without reporting or without being beckoned. Direct to the player, counts towards his T and total foul counts (as well as the team foul count), but no direct or indirect is charged to the head coach. You sat the coach unnecessarily and saddled him with two unearned and undeserved indirect Ts.

Yep, I read it but only part of it apparently. The part I read was specific to Bench Personnel. Unfortunately the table doesn't address the bolded section below.

10.4.2 - Bench personnel shall not enter the court unless by permission of an official to attend an injured player

You are correct that I should have applied 10.2.2:

A substitute shall not enter the court without being beckoned by an official between quarters.

The more I do this the more I realize how much I have left to learn. Thanks for the reminder.

[tjchamp]

That's my point. The subs are not "players" until beckoned. As such they are still bench personnel. Techs to bench personnel get indirects to coach. The foul summary seems to contradict the penalty for this situation. 10.4.2 indicates T for entry unless permission of an official. The penalty for 10.4.1-4 is direct T to offender, and indirect to the coach.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by tjchamp

The subs are not "players" until beckoned.

False. Subs become players once they legally enter the court or, if they enter illegally, once the ball becomes live.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tjchamp

That's my point. The subs are not "players" until beckoned. As such they are still bench personnel. Techs to bench personnel get indirects to coach. The foul summary seems to contradict the penalty for this situation. 10.4.2 indicates T for entry unless permission of an official. The penalty for 10.4.1-4 is direct T to offender, and indirect to the coach.

You're looking at the wrong rule.

Subs are their own category; not bench and not players. But they are treated like players if the T is for entering without being beckoned or not reporting. See rule 10.2.

That said, if a sub, while waiting to be beckoned, pops off to the ref as he runs by during a live ball; that'll be an indirect to the coach as well.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rufus

Yep, I read it but only part of it apparently. ....
The more I do this the more I realize how much I have left to learn. Thanks for the reminder.

I haven't kicked this in a game, but I did kick in a discussion on this board, once.

[tjchamp]

Yep, I missed it. I was confusing 10.2 with 10.4.2.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No T to the coach, just the sub. Read the Technical Foul Penalty Summary page at the back of the rule book.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Rufus

I don't think this is correct. The table states that Technicals for bench personal (in this case entering the court without permission) is charged to the substitute/bench personnel and is an indirect on the coach.

Nope. Perhaps thinking of it in this manner will help you. The head coach is only responsible for the people IN HIS BENCH AREA. Once the team members go to the table and report to the scorer they become substitutes and are not under the direct supervision of the head coach. The scorer is in charge of them now. This is similar to the game officials being in charge of the ten players on the court. Therefore, since the substitutes are properly NOT in the team bench area (meaning that they are permitted to be elsewhere at that time), they are not bench personnel. Thus no indirect technical foul to the head coach.

Originally Posted by tjchamp

That's my point. The subs are not "players" until beckoned. As such they are still bench personnel. Techs to bench personnel get indirects to coach. The foul summary seems to contradict the penalty for this situation. 10.4.2 indicates T for entry unless permission of an official. The penalty for 10.4.1-4 is direct T to offender, and indirect to the coach.

See my comments directly above.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That said, if a sub, while waiting to be beckoned, pops off to the ref as he runs by during a live ball; that'll be an indirect to the coach as well.

I disagree due to the reasoning put forth in my above comments.

[Caesar's Ghost]

I dont think this is sound logic. If the sub at the table mouths off to you, than you are still going to stick the coach with an indirect because hes still bench personnel.

I agree with the ruling that its not a T to the coach but I think it just needs to be remembered not tried to lump with other rules.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I agree.


Nope. Perhaps thinking of it in this manner will help you. The head coach is only responsible for the people IN HIS BENCH AREA. Once the team members go to the table and report to the scorer they become substitutes and are not under the direct supervision of the head coach. The scorer is in charge of them now. This is similar to the game officials being in charge of the ten players on the court. Therefore, since the substitutes are properly NOT in the team bench area (meaning that they are permitted to be elsewhere at that time), they are not bench personnel. Thus no indirect technical foul to the head coach.


See my comments directly above.


I disagree due to the reasoning put forth in my above comments.

What's the rules basis for this reasoning? My understanding is that substitutes are treated like players only when they make the mistake of entering too quickly. If they were to enter the court during a fight, for example....

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

What's the rules basis for this reasoning? My understanding is that substitutes are treated like players only when they make the mistake of entering too quickly. If they were to enter the court during a fight, for example....

There is none. It is also inconsistent with the way a player is DQ'd....bench personel as soon as the coach is notified even if the player is still on the court (perhaps at the far end).

Subs are bench personnel until they become players. Improperly substituting has a specific penalty defined to be charged to the player. Aside from that, their actions are actions of non-players (bench personnel).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

What's the rules basis for this reasoning? My understanding is that substitutes are treated like players only when they make the mistake of entering too quickly. If they were to enter the court during a fight, for example....

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

There is none. It is also inconsistent with the way a player is DQ'd....bench personel as soon as the coach is notified even if the player is still on the court (perhaps at the far end).

Subs are bench personnel until they become players. Improperly substituting has a specific penalty defined to be charged to the player. Aside from that, their actions are actions of non-players (bench personnel).

In the end, I have to agree with you guys that the NFHS is simply inconsistent on this matter due to definition 4-34-2 clearly saying that substitutes are bench personnel. So much for my earlier attempt to rationalize an inconsistency in the NFHS rules. I still think that my method for handling substitutes at the table would be better.