20-Second I.O.T. for Blood?
 

When a player is injured, an official should direct the timekeeper to start the 20-second clock for the interval of time needed for a substitution.

Does an official do the same if a player is bleeding (but not injured)?

see rule 3-3-7

Is bleeding not an injury?

If not, it is the direct result of an injury.

I'm questioning a RefSchool ruling.

Rule 3-3-7 says nothing about the 20-second I.O.T. I suppose bleeding is an injury, but getting someone else's blood on your uni isn't, and you're still coming out nonetheless.

This is all about the I.O.T.

Did you read the new case book plays? Or the old ones?

Couldn't find anything in the case book, JR, but upon further review, 2-12-5 clearly says the timer will sound a warning signal five seconds into the 20-second interval used when "a player [is] directed to leave the game."

The RefSchool question that spawned this thread reads:

"B-1 is directed to the bench because of blood on his/her uniform.
The official directs the timer to start the 20-second clock to replace B-1. Is the official correct?"

I had YES. RefSchool says NO, citing 2-12-5 and 10-5-3, the latter which has nothing to do with the question.

In citing 2-12-5, you left out "except as in 3-3-6" which is in the NOTE.

There are 3 new case plays this year under 3.3.6.

I think the answer is NO because the coach can elect to use a time-out to fix the blood situation.

Agree

+1

The request for the time out must precede the starting of the 20 second interval. If not they must replace the player.

Gee, somebody actually took the time to read the new case book plays cited above.

I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell ya! :D

rhetorical question
 

So this would also apply to concussions? :D

Correct. That's why the test answer is no. You don't automatically direct the timer to start the replacement period. You wait until you know whether the coach wants a time-out.