4 players

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by yanaqa

what started out as just a local phenomenon at a highschool in brandon,florida is about to stretch it's boundries to the whole nation

spam-o-rama

[AKOFL]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Really? In what cases should 10-1-9 not be enforced?

Please enlighten us.

10.3.2 sit B was my thought. Advanage gained appears to be the difference in the enforcement of theses two sits. That's just my thought. It's similar to the returning frow the throw-in. If they try to gain an advantage by thoes few steps out of bounds (use a screen) before returning, it's a T. If you have a kid do the same thing with out the screen I've got nothing. Does that make any sense?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by wizard

What about case book 10.3.2 (Sit. B)? Sounds like the situation that was here.

10.3.2 SITUATION B: After a lengthy substitution process involving multiple substitutions for both Team A and Team B, A5 goes to the bench and remains there, mistakenly believing he/she has been replaced. The ball is put in play even though Team A has only four players on the court. Team A is bringing the ball into A’s frontcourt when the coach of Team A realizes they have only four players. The coach yells for A5 to return and he/she sprints directly onto the court and catches up with the play. RULING: No technical foul is charged to A5. A5’s return to the court was not deceitful, nor did it provide A5 an unfair positioning advantage on the court.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

10.3.2 sit B was my thought. Advanage gained appears to be the difference in the enforcement of theses two sits. That's just my thought. It's similar to the returning frow the throw-in. If they try to gain an advantage by thoes few steps out of bounds (use a screen) before returning, it's a T. If you have a kid do the same thing with out the screen I've got nothing. Does that make any sense?

Unfortunately, you are using a different criterion than the one the NFHS put forth. Gaining an advantage is not a consideration when the situation takes place FOLLOWING A TIME-OUT OR INTERMISSION. The NFHS has made it clear that under those circumstances a technical foul shall be assessed.

I do not like it that the ruling is different following a substitution process. I'll mention it to my committee member and see if we can get the rulings to match.

[wizard]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I do not like it that the ruling is different following a substitution process. I'll mention it to my committee member and see if we can get the rulings to match.

I agree. Both are very similar by nature. I've seen both, and both were not deceitful, but honest mistakes.

[AKOFL]

both of these are listed under delays that get a T, but 10.3.2 sit b is no T. So you can only make a mistake after lengthy substitutions. What about subs durring a timeout? Any thoughts nevada