You cannot substitute a player out if you have no substitute to go into the game. If the coach only has 5 players on court and wants to have a player come off and have a rest, he can only do so with the referee's OK and during a dead ball period as leaving the court without permission is a Technical infringement. He/she will still need the referee's permission to go back into the game during a dead ball period. That is how I would handle it.

As I understand it, if the player is fit to play, he must remain on the court. I think the word substitution says it all. If there is no player to come into the game as a substitute, how can you effect a substitution?The team consists of five players on court not four and a bench sitter. An injury to one of the five players would be the only way to alter this.Article 4.2.2 is as close as it gets.

What is the NFHS ruling on playing with four with a fifth available? I couldn't find it in the thread.

If a fifth is available, that person must be a player on the court.

^^ And what if they refuse to play with 5?

This situation is not normal and is not covered in the rules or the casebook. The only reference I have to this is rule 46.13 "The refereee shall have the power to make decisions on any point not specifically covered by these rules" and rule 4.2.2 does not really apply as there is no substitute to go into the game.
cheers

That's exactly my opinion: we can't read in a player's or coach's mind. If the coach wants a player to sit on the bench, reducing their team to four, we can't force this player to play.

Where's the advantage for this team? Being four against five is a (voluntarily chosen) disadvantage. If they have reasons to do it, it's their choice.

"Objection!" will shout M. T. DeNucci senior (my paesano :)), "The coach said it's for talking to the player." Well, that player might suffer from some disease and they don't want to tell the world about it.

I know that the rules say that "five players shall be on the court", but this assumes the players are apt to play.

Ciao

Yet when we take into account 5.3

"If the injured player cannot continue to play immediately (within approximately 15 seconds) or, if he receives treatment, he must be substituted unless the team is reduced to fewer than five (5) players on the playing court"

Doesn't this suggest that there must be five players on the court even during injury. Of course this is not common sense - if a player was to be so sick that I could physically tell they couldn't play, I would allow them to be benched.

However, eg-italy, like you said officials shouldn't attempt to read the mind of the coach - but if the coach says that they want to bench the player because they missed an easy shot, they generally mean it - coaches don't understand how to deceive us properly.

If you can find a solid rule that states a coach could take their fifth player off, let me know - otherwise, rather than letting it come down to interpretation, lets just throw it under the elasticity of the rules and powers of the umpire.

Under your ruling on the issue, a coach could sub off their third, and fourth player as well, and play with two on the court - under FIBA 21.1 the game is lost by default when the team has fewer than 2 players on the playing court, ready to play.

Would you allow them to play with two?

This means that they can keep the injured player, who has recovered, in case they have no substitute. If they have a player available, they must do a substitution.

Well, not every coach. :)

Why not? It's their choice. Of course, elastic power is used in this case. But the official should not permit to make a travesty of the game. (Is this correct English?)

Common sense should never be left at home. :)

Ciao

Almost. "Permit" generally takes a direct object, so "...permit anyone to make a travesty of the game" would be better.

Prego.