Substitution Question

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

I'm going with no. Don't have my books, but unless there's an exception listed in that rule, or a case play that dictates otherwise, I don't think the delay reporting has any bearing on the fact that the substitute had not reported to the table before the warning horn to end the time-out.

I agree with that.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The player may now enter.

Every new infraction creates a new point for substitution to occur unless they're expressly prohibited (e.g., before the first of two FTs).

A parallel would be a technical foul that is called after the timeout but before the ball is live. Any player from the bench may be subbed in to take the shots (assuming they were not just taken out of the game...required to sit 1 tick) whether they were there before the 15 second warning occurred or not.

A technical foul would be an exception to the general rule, which is exactly what Hawkeye mentioned. However, all substitutes would not be able to enter. Only the a substitute who is going to attempt the first FT would allowed. If that happened to be the same individual who came to the table late during the time-out, so be it, but that is up to the coach or captain. The T does not create a totally new substitution opportunity.
In order for that to happen, a new timing interval must be entered (a 20-second replacement period for an injured or DQ'd player or another charged time-out) or the ball must become live and then dead again. The clock running is not important in this case.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.