Subs with multiple fouls

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

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?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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?

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

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It seems weird, but demz da rulz

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

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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

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?

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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?

No. It is two separate situations.

The penalty for rule 10 , False Double Fouls, tells us to penalize them as two separate acts. So, why should we not administer them as two separate acts.

Just curious, do you have me marked as "ignore" on your preferences? Or are you just thinking about marking me as "ignore"? Honestly, I don't mind getting my chops busted. I usually learn something just after it happens!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

No. It is two separate situations.

The penalty for rule 10 , False Double Fouls, tells us to penalize them as two separate acts. So, why should we not administer them as two separate acts.

Just curious, do you have me marked as "ignore" on your preferences? Or are you just thinking about marking me as "ignore"? Honestly, I don't mind getting my chops busted. I usually learn something just after it happens!

Yup, and we do penalize them as separate acts. But nowhere in any rule that I know of does it state that different substitution rules should be applied in any false double foul. You use one of the ones listed in 3-3-1, not 2.

I don't have anybody marked to "ignore" and never have as long as I've posted here, Scratch. If I disagree with somebody, the kinder, gentler JR will just politely tell them so. And verse-visa.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, and we do penalize them as separate acts. But nowhere in any rule that I know of does it state that different substitution rules should be applied in any false double foul. You use one of the ones listed in 3-3-1, not 2.

Why use one when you have two separate acts. Apply the substitution rules that apply to each act. It just makes sense to me. But my senses have been questioned many times before.

I don't have anybody marked to "ignore" and never have as long as I've posted here, Scratch. If I disagree with somebody, the kinder, gentler JR will just politely tell them so. And verse-visa.

Believe me I know. I hate to do the "agree to disagree" thing, but I am not sure how much longer I can discuss this irrelevant (as JRut calls it) issue. Merry Christmas to all who are reading and I wish all of you best of times to come.