Six Players Participating ???

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Just for fun, let's twist this around a little bit. Let's add to the casebook situation that substitute A is a sixth player participating for Team A, which is recognized by an official who sees substitute A enter the court without reporting, or being beckoned, and who also sees substitute A participating as a sixth player are on the court during a live ball, while the clock is running. Let's also pretend that this situation is not listed under the heading "Not Being Beckoned", in fact, let's pretend that there is no casebook citation number (10.2.2). Would we call a team technical foul for a "sixth player" infraction, or a substitute technical foul for a "not being beckoned" infraction? Or both? Which technical foul we call is important, because the "not being beckoned" infraction is a foul that counts toward the players total (and team total), which could lead toward a disqualification, while the "sixth player" infraction is a team technical that would only count toward the team foul total toward the bonus, or double bonus.

This is similar to just another ref's link (above), but I think the situation is a little simpler and straight forward.

Which technical foul, or both? Citations please.

The 6 player infraction is for when you only see 6 on the court and can't know who shouldn't be there. There is no way to tell who should have left when subs were made. In fact, you may have very well beckoned them but didn't see that someone stayed. Or it may have been after a timeout and the wrong number of players returned (and we don't normally beckon for that when they reported before the warning horn).

If you see the 6th player enter the court, it is the substitute infraction.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If you see the 6th player enter the court, it is the substitute infraction.

Camron Rust: Sounds good. Just to confirm, you believe that it is only a substitute infraction? I do.

[Back In The Saddle]

Oh good heavens! Where has this appalling bloodlust for piling on multiple T's lately come from? It needs to crawl back into whatever dank hole it emerged from.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Camron Rust: Sounds good. Just to confirm, you believe that it is only a substitute infraction? I do.

No, it is also traveling.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, it is also traveling.

It used to be traveling, then it was an illegal dribble, now it's just illegal.