4 players

[just another ref]

Went to watch girls state semi-final games tonight. Start of 2nd quarter, white team, which had been playing straight man to man, (and getting shredded) wisely switched to a zone. Blue had the throw-in to start the quarter. But something looked funny about the zone defense. It had a big hole in it. After 5-10 seconds, coaches finally noticed and spoke to #13 on the bench. She stood up, hesitated briefly, then took her position on the court. Official turned to watch as she entered............and made no call.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Went to watch girls state semi-final games tonight. Start of 2nd quarter, white team, which had been playing straight man to man, (and getting shredded) wisely switched to a zone. Blue had the throw-in to start the quarter. But something looked funny about the zone defense. It had a big hole in it. After 5-10 seconds, coaches finally noticed and spoke to #13 on the bench. She stood up, hesitated briefly, then took her position on the court. Official turned to watch as she entered............and made no call.

Perhaps they were used to working 5th grade games and not properly applying all of the rules.

The situation clearly warrants a Team Tech for failing to have all five players return at the same time following a time-out or intermission. 10-1-9

[AKOFL]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Perhaps they were used to working 5th grade games and not properly applying all of the rules.

The situation clearly warrants a Team Tech for failing to have all five players return at the same time following a time-out or intermission. 10-1-9

Not always the case.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

Not always the case.

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

Please enlighten us.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

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

Please enlighten us.

The "approximately" part makes it subjective.

[wizard]

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

[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?

[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.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

Not always the case.

He didn't say it was always the case. He said "This situation warrants...."

[zm1283]

What is the difference between what NevadaRef cited (Failing to have all five players return at the same time), and the rule about entering the court without being beckoned? Does the player have to be at the table to be penalized for entering without being beckoned? I remember we had a lengthy thread about this a while back.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by zm1283

What is the difference between what NevadaRef cited (Failing to have all five players return at the same time), and the rule about entering the court without being beckoned? Does the player have to be at the table to be penalized for entering without being beckoned? I remember we had a lengthy thread about this a while back.

A substitute must be beckoned. 10-2-2 This was not a substitute, but a player who was supposed to be in the game, and therefore was supposed to return at the same time as the other players. 10-1-9

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Perhaps they were used to working 5th grade games and not properly applying all of the rules.

So you would call this in the 5th grade game, right after you T'd the kid with the illegal jersey 'cause he left his real jersey at grandma's house.

Very impressive rules knowledge.

[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

Edit :
Shut em down ?
I agree.
mick

[Adam]

Is it some sort of A-5 offensive formation?

[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