|
|||
Had this exact scenario today. At midcourt, ball on baseline back court. I had subs coming in, and hand the "Stop Sign" out for my partner. As I am counting the players, I see confusion at the bench and only 4 players on the court. I keep my stop sign up, and double check to see if I hadn't missed anyone. I don't see my partner put the ball in, but I IMMEDIATELY blew the whistle and killed it. Since my hand was still clearly up I didn't want to have someone run onto the court and then we get into a furball T.
All that to say, if no one notices there are only 4 until the ball is in play then that team plays with 4 until the next dead ball when they can legally sub |
|
|||
This is kind of a gray area, is it not? The rule says the team must not fail to have all players return at approximately the same time. PERIOD
In the case play given, the technical is called when B5 reenters just in time to catch a long pass, thus apparently gaining an advantage. Edit: Maybe not so gray. SITUATION 12: Following a (a) charged time-out; or (b) a lengthy substitution process involving multiple substitutions for both teams, A5 goes to the bench and remains there mistakenly believing he/she has been replaced by a substitute. 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 onto the court and catches up with play. RULING: In (a), the officials shall stop play and assess a team technical foul for not having all players return to the court at approximately the same time after a time-out. The technical foul counts toward the team-foul count. In (b), the officials may permit play to continue without penalty. A5's return to the court was not deceitful, nor did it provide A5 an unfair positioning advantage on the court. COMMENT: Even though neither situation provided A5 or Team A with an advantage, teams are expected to return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out. The officials should have also followed the prescribed mechanics and counted the number of players on the court, ensuring each team has the legal number of players. (10-1-9; 10-3-3)
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove Last edited by just another ref; Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 01:25am. |
|
|||
In this case, as soon as you notice that the team only has four, unless the opponent is in the process of scoring, then you should wait until that action finishes.
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Couple of question on this issue? Why does the committee choose to treat these two situation differently? Both plays are simple misunderstandings. Why have a T for one but not the other?
Next question: What if there were multiple substitutions during a timeout?
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
Quote:
I believe that the provision for "following a time-out or intermission" has primacy... = WHACK. |
|
|||
I tend to believe that too, but I can't really say why.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
Quote:
If there was, then the rule for returning to the court following such applies, whether there are also substitutions is unimportant. The team members are returning to the court following a time-out or intermission, so that's what counts. |
|
||||
I think it's a miserable case play, personally. This is one situation where I think the situation deserves a technical foul and the only way to avoid it *should* be to play with four until the next dead ball.
But I will do as the case play says, of course. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
True, this NFHS ruling was split into two separate plays when added to the Case Book. They are 10.1.9 and 10.3.2 Situation B.
|
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
too many players | representing | Basketball | 25 | Wed Jan 27, 2010 08:24am |
4 players | just another ref | Basketball | 20 | Wed Mar 04, 2009 08:45pm |
Four Players | tjchamp | Basketball | 5 | Sat Dec 24, 2005 02:50pm |
Only 8 players - FED | blueump | Baseball | 3 | Wed Apr 21, 2004 08:49am |
4 players | mj | Basketball | 22 | Wed Jan 08, 2003 07:24am |