If you're talking about that "roll over" thread, that one was an interpretation of rules language. We disagreed on the interpretation of what constitutes a "roll" and we still do. And we probably will until the FED issues something on it (if ever). Is that what you're talking about?

This thread is different. There is just no rules language that I know of that says you can't bring the subs in immediately after reporting the personal and technical fouls. And 3-3-01(d) says you can.

I think Scratch is right on the money. I also don't think there's a big deal in going with A either.

Rut, you need some Christmas cheer. :D

Actually, the rules, as written, support keeping the subs out until the personal foul FTs have only 1 remaining. The TF FT's don't occur until after the PF penalty is completed. When it comes time for TF FT's the sub rules that allow a sub in to take the TF FTs come into play.

I'm more inclined to go with Snaqwell's answer and go with B.

Y'All ??? Are You That Kid In The Video ???
 

"Cogito ergo sum." (René Descartes)

I ergo'd sum but then I just had to ergo sum more! :D I think.

Yes, but there's no language to interpret in the traveling case play. The ruling in 4.44.5B says a player who is on the floor, holding the ball, can pass, shoot, start a dribble, request a time-out or sit up if he's on his back. Those are the ONLY things the ruling says the player CAN do.

Further, it specifically says that he can sit up if he's flat out his back. So why wouldn't the ruling include that he could roll to his side if it was allowed? Why would it tell us one thing he can do but ignore another if it was allowed?

I guess we can imagine. Mr. FED says, "Well, actually he can sit up if he's on his back and he can roll to his side but we just decided not to include that part in the ruling." http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...ages/santa.gif

Sorry Woddy but that makes no sense. If he were allowed to roll to his side, they would have included that with the sitting up statement.

Merry Christmas! http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...ges/santa2.gif

Sooooo....if the fouls were reversed in this situation and the technical foul preceded the personal foul, you'd keep all subs out until after the technical foul penalty is completed and there is only one FT left for the personal foul penalty? Or would you allow a sub in to shoot one or both of the technical foul FT's as allowed under 8-3, but not let the other eligible subs at the table come in during that same substitution opportunity?

You don't have 4.44.5SitB in your case book? The case book play that says "A1 may pass, shoot, dribble or call a timeout. Once A1 has the ball and is no longer sliding, he/she may not roll OVER."? Somebody steal that case book play? And at Christmas too? :eek:

Case book plays are put out to clarify rules. It's true, it's true.....:D

We disagree. Shrug.

You and your family have a great Christmas too, Tony.

Nope. I would do what I said earlier. As the rules tell us to do.

Nope, I'd let all subs in during the T shots. After the final T shot, the subs at the bench would have to wait until right before the final personal foul FT.

It seems weird, but demz da rulz

Yes, I quoted it. Why did you omit the rest of the ruling? If flat on his/her back, A1 may sit up without violating.

And why didn't you answer my question?

The ruling tells us what the player CAN do. "pass, shoot, dribble or call a timeout...If flat on his/her back, A1 may sit up."

Nowhere does it tell us he can roll over on his side. Wonder why that is?

It's real simple...it's just not there. Merry Christmas to you and yours as well. http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...ages/santa.gif

Wait a tick! Is this a variation of Rules Rulz or Rulz Rules or Rulze Rulse :D or whatever it really is? I like "demz da rules, baby!" :D

It's not in the rule. It's in the case play.

Are you really saying a player either laying flat or sitting can't roll to the side while making a pass?

We disagree. Shrug.

What rules?

Are you really saying that 3-3-1(c) and 3-3-1(d) should both be used on the same situation? You'd apply 2 different rules to one situation?

Shudder.....

Or am I reading something wrong?