Wrong Number In Book ???
 

AAU game. Black 53 is fouled in the act of shooting. Five Black substitutes report to the table. Black 53 makes the first free throw. Four Black substitutes are beckoned onto the court, and four Black players leave the court. Black coach indicates that the remaining substitute at the table is for the free throw shooter. Black 53 makes the second free throw. I blow my whistle and beckon in the Black substitute at the table. Black 53 goes out of the game, and is replaced by his substitute. Before my partner hands the ball to White team for the inbound, the table calls me over and the White scorer, the home scorer, the official scorer, informs me that there is no Black 53 in the book. I call over the Black coach, he checks with his assistant coach, who admits that he incorrectly wrote the player's number in the book. White coach wants the technical foul called and the free throws.

Is it too late to penalize? Black 53 is no longer a player. He was legally substituted for. His substitute was legally beckoned onto the court and became a player. Black 53 is now bench personnel. The ball never become live. After the substitution my partner never handed the ball to White to inbound.

My own little administrative technical foul study sheet reads like this:

Penalized when they occur, after ten minute time limit. The infraction occurs when the scorer is advised to add to or change the scorebook. The foul must be charged when it occurs and enforced when the ball next becomes live. Once the ball has become live, it is too late to penalize. A maximum of one technical foul per team regardless of the number of infractions:

A team shall not require the scorer to change a team member, or player, number in the scorebook (with exception), after the ten minute time limit. Team technical foul. If there is no request for change, or if a team member does not become a player, thus avoiding the change, there is no penalty.

A team shall not require a player to change to a number in the scorebook after the ten minute time limit. Team technical foul. A maximum of one team technical foul is charged regardless of the number of players, and substitutes, not wearing the number indicated in the scorebook. Each player must wear the number indicated in the scorebook, or change the scorebook number to that which the player is wearing. Any additional substitutes who become players and require the changing of the number indicated for them in the scorebook will not result in a penalty as the one maximum technical has already been charged to the team for this administrative infraction. If there is no request for change, or if the team member does not become a player, thus avoiding the change, there is no penalty.

Please help.

This one gets penalized for changing the book. IMO, B53 scored points and the book now needs to be changed to reflect his correct number; issue the T.

I helped by pointing out that you may have been thinking the wrong colors?
I would say also that the fact that points were scored by 53 FORCE the book to be changed. IMO, if 53 had not scored or fouled or done anything to cause the scorebook to be changed then he is fine. You would just have to chalk it up to that player/coach/team 'getting away' with one. Unless/until the coach tries to put him back into the game, then you have a technical when he comes onto the court and is a 'legal' player (unless you want to call him an "illegal legal" player or a "legal illegal" player!) It seems akin to a team that sneaks 6 players onto the floor w/out the officials recognizing it, and the extra player hops off the floor before we catch them.

We've covered this so many times before, Billy, that you obviously know my response. The team committed an infraction. They must justly be penalized for it.

In this particular case, my sentiments match with Snaqs.
However, even if this team member had not scored, he still participated and the scorer is required to keep a record of all team members who start and those who enter the contest as substitutes. That record is the official scorebook. I'm sure that you've seen the boxes to check off when a team member plays in a particular quarter.
Therefore, I disagree with Judtech's position, but I must concede that someone on the NFHS rules committee feels as he does as shown by the recent NFHS interp.

I was actually wondering about the idea of it being related to him scoring. Frankly, even the fact that he made a shot attempt would, to me, require changing the score book. Further, the fact that he got playing time, which is tracked everywhere at the high school level for participation limitation reasons, means his number needs to be accurate and therefore changed in the book.

That was my thought process earlier, but I questioned it so I stopped after noting he had scored.

Nevada, there's an interp that says if he doesn't score, it can be ignored if we didn't catch it in time?

Frankly, if I was the coach, this is exactly the time I'd want this T charged. The other team is getting the ball anyway, so there's no loss of possession.

I agree, but more importantly your view is validated by the NFHS rules book per 2-11-1.

3.2.2 C was published last season. I strongly disagree with the ruling in part b. I believe that it cannot be substantiated by the text of the rules.

It had to be written by lawyers!! It is not what you KNOW it is what you can PROVE. How can you prove that 53 was in the game? If the player is not in the book, and had caused nothing in the book to be altered then how can you PROVE that he played? Did the official book fail to enter his name and cross off the quarter played? Yes. But that was not noticed until AFTER this player was OUT of the game. Therefore, if the player does not return to the game you can not PROVE that he was ever (officially) in the game because there would be no alteration to the official ledger recording the game. Sure every mom and pops video camera will show him playing, sure YOU know he played, the radio people know he played, even the running box score computer people know he played. However, none of those are offiical ledgers and recorders of the game, therefore, what they KNOW does not count towards what can be officially PROVED.
Is it semantics. Absolutely. But words means things. (Sort of like the difference between an eligible player and an available player, but I digress)
Fortunately in this case, that can of worms didn't have to be opened and can be returned to the shelf next to the SPAM Hash and sardines!

Wait a minute...
 

Rule 10-1-2c says it's a technical foul if you have to change "a team member's or player's number in the scorebook." It doesn't matter whether the person is on the floor or the bench, and the TF takes place when the error is discovered (provided that team didn't have one earlier).

So, where's the confusion?

If he is on the bench, then why do you have to change the book?

Because the book's listing is erroneous.

The book only lists eligible players. The player being on the bench has nothing to do with his/her name being in the book. It is when the player wants to go into the game that issue of having the name in the official book becomes an issue.

The book lists team members (managers, assistant coaches, etc., notwithstanding). If a team member is listed with an incorrect number, it's a violation.

You have to change the book in order to properly record the made free throws.

Where did they record the free throws when they happened?

Not true, sir.

You need to consult 3.2.2 Sit B.

3.2.2 SITUATION B: Three minutes before the game starts, it is discovered: (a)
two Team B members have wrong numbers in the scorebook; or (b) two Team B
team members are wearing the same number. RULING: In (a), if either or both
team member’s number is changed in the scorebook, one technical foul is
charged to Team B. If there is no request for change or if neither becomes a
player, thus avoiding the change, there is no penalty. In (b), a technical foul is
charged to Team B upon discovery of the identical numbers. Only one team member
may wear a given number; the other must change to a number not already in
use before participating. (10-1-2)

The situation you provide, Nevada, isn't comparable to the OP. The case book sitch took place prior to the game; the OP's sitch happened during the game, when 53 Black had already become a player, and even if he weren't a player at the time of discovery, he was still undeniably a team member.