Just a quick question regarding the new blood rule. If lets say A1 is injured and there is blood on his/her person and their uniform. The coach calls a time-out takes care of the blood on his player and due to the blood on his/her jersey has the player change to a different numbered uniform to wear. Can he/she play? With or without penalty? How would you handle this situation???

Jamie

Yes they should play.
 

You should do everything in your power to allow the player to play. So if using another number for the player to play with blood on it, let them do that. The casebook has a play that makes this very clear.

<b>3.3.6. SITUATION A</b>

Hope that helps.

Peace

Rut is correct. A player was <b> always </b> able to use a teammate's jersey to continue to play without penalty when blood was present.

The difference now is that a coach is allowed to call a time-out and keep the player in the game.

In the past, the player had to sit out until the next substitution opportunity after the clock had run.

Z

Ours rules clinic this past Saturday spent some time on this subject. One item of note, is that if A1 has blood on the body and uniform and can't be ready by the time we are ready to put the ball in play, Team A can call a time out to allow the player to have time (30 or 60 seconds) to "clean up". However, a time out by B does not cover player A1..... the time out must be by the team affected by the blood.

Scott-
I do not agree with your statement. I do not see where it states 100% that Team A player cannot come back in if Team B calls the time out. If I am wrong please let me know!

AK ref SE

Does that matter?
 

I do not think who calls a timeout matters. Unless you can find a casebook play that deals with this specificially, I would not have a problem with any player playing regardless of who called a timeout.

Peace

Scott,
I think I'll let 'im change on the opponents time out, based on "no rule against it" , and as you said, "...ready by the time we are ready to put the ball in play".
mick

I don't think that B can be granted a timeout until either A1 has been replaced or A1 is ready to play.

While I haven't seen the actual wording yet the summary says:
<quote>3-3-5,3-3-6: Permits a player who is required to leave the game for blood or injury to remain in the game if <b><em>the team</em></b> calls a time-out and the situation can be corrected by the resumption of play.</quote> (emphasis mine)

The rule is clear (even if it's poorly edited): "Unless a time out is requested by his/her team and the situation can be corrected by the resumption of play

Guys. I was relaying the words from our rules clinic this past Saturday. The interpretation provided by the TASO clinicians was as I said above.

Now, whether this changes or not I can't say, but......

I think Bob's quote above does clearly support this interpretation

Bob -- what if the TO is called by Team B before the blood is discovered? For example, ball goes sailing out of bounds, trail calls "White [Team B] Ball", Coach B requests and is granted a TO, and THEN lead escorts player A1 over to the sideline and points out the blood. If they get it taken care of before B's TO is finished, do they have to call another one? In other words, is this a penalty, or is it just a practical matter?

what about a worse case senario:
A1 is bleeding and has bled on B2's jersey, there is 2 seconds left in the game, B down by 3(B will inbound at the 28ft mark in front court) and B2 is the top 3 point shooter for team B. A has one 30 sec TO left and B has none. according to the interp. from our state, A may call its TO and keep A1 in the game(if bleeding stopped during TO) but B2 must be replaced until the next oppportunity to sub. or if B has a TO each team must use its TO to keep players in the game(how would you administer these TO's concurrent or consecutive?).

I agree with that interp.

There is no such thing as "concurrent" TOs, so they'd be consecutive. Of course, if both teams (NFHS; calling team NCAA) are ready before the end of the second TO, you can resume play.

Juulie -- If B has already called the TO before the blood is discovered, then A can fix it during that TO.

Think of the rule this way: If something happens to your player that delays the game, then you will incur a penalty. The penalty is either remove the player or be charged with a TO.

In your play, there was no delay. Thus, there is no penalty.

It may be that if A calls a timeout in such a case, it may buy B back in as well if B2 is ready at the end of the timeout. Makes A think about whether to actually call the timeout to keep A1 in or not.

I'm sure that there will be some loopholes in this rule for the first couple of years.