Substitute Technical
 

Need some answers:


Player is leaving the court after his substitute has been beckoned to enter during a dead ball. As the kid is leaving the court he recieves a technical for saying something to the ref. I understand that at this point he is bench personel even though he hasnt officially made it to the bench, but does this techinical count towards one of his five personal or is it a team techinical on bench personel. I know it is an indirect on the coach. The case book says the foul is added to the team foul count.

The technical is charged to the player and counts towards DQ.

Even though he is now bench personnel, the foul is charged to the individual, not a team T. It also counts as a team foul toward the bonus and toward his 5 for disqualification.

I knew I was right but the first time I had this happen. The coaches were livid when I made the head coach sit.

And is an indirect T on the HC as well, as SoMoRef said in his OP.

Just as a point of reference, a bench technical refers to an unsportsmanlike or other defined act under 10-4 committed by bench personnel. If any team member or other bench personnel (i.e. AC, manager) commits an unsportsmanlike act, you charge the T directly to that person and an indirect to the HC - see penalty section for articles 1-4 under 10-4. Scorer should record it per 2-11-5.

If it's a team member, it counts towards their 2T/5 total foul limit. A single flagrant foul or the second technical foul charged directly to any bench personnel, results in disqualification of the offender. Ejected adult bench personnel shall leave the vicinity (out of sight and sound) of the playing area immediately and are prohibited from any further contact (direct or indirect) with the team during the remainder of the game. If it's a student, they remain on the bench.

See 4-34 for relevant definitions....

Unless the player is actually at the bench (and maybe this one was), how do you KNOW that a player walking in the general direction of the bench is the player that is leaving the game.

What if the coach, after the player is whistled for the T, indicates that he wanted a different player subbed out and was only calling that player over to tell him something? Hmmm. Seems unreliable to assume a specific player is bench personnel until they are actually on the bench or have been disqualified and are thus bench personnel by rule.

Cam,

See the OP - nothing in there about the player being called over by the coach. He was leaving the floor after his sub was beckoned to enter and as he was leaving made a comment to the official that earned him a T. As soon as his sub legally enters the court, the player being replaced is bench personnel per 3-4-3. No need to over analyze it or play what if.

Bench Personnel, Ejected, Disqualified ...
 

Isn't he bench personnel as soon as the head coach is informed that the player is ejected, or for that matter, simply disqualified.?

Also, by mechanic, or rule, isn't the head coach informed before the player in a simple disqualification? How about an ejection?

Are you sure about that rule reference?

Billy,

In the OP it was a simple substitution during a dead ball - no DQ involved, so it's not relevant to the situation.

Yes in the event of a DQ, the player becomes bench personnel as soon as the HC is notified.

Cam makes a good point. I assume it was obvious in the OP that the mouthy one was the one for whom the sub came in, but there could be some question; in which case I'd simply go with a player T.

Anybody Know Of A Good Twelve Step Program ???
 

Sorry. Again. 'Tis the season. Too much nog.

Snaq,

No argument if there's any question, but in my experience that doesn't happen very often. 99% of the time the sub coming in knows who they're replacing and tells them as they enter the court - that player then heads for the bench. If the coach wanted something different, he needs to correct it right away before that kid leaves the court, because once he does, he's not coming back until time runs off the clock.

Again, not relevant to the OP - as posted it was about as clear as it can be.

Several times a season I'll see a coach change his mind before the player leaves the court. So at what point does the player become bench personnel?

The player became bench personnel when his substitute entered the court, even if nobody knew which player momentarily. I would think, in the OP, signal the T, then, when that player goes to the bench, we would know that it is also an indirect on the coach.

You and the scorer try and determine who was being replaced. If the player being replaced got the "T", then he's bench personnel and the head coach gets an indirect "T". If it wasn't the player being replaced who got the "T", then just give that player the "T" with no indirect "T" to the head coach. And if you can't determine without doubt the identity of the player being replaced, then assess the maximum penalty...which includes an indirect "T" given to the head coach.

Use the direction of case book play 3.3.1SitF iow. Close enough for me.

I'm not sure I agree (emphasis on "not sure"). If the player becomes bench personnel when his sub enters the court, then the coach can't change his mind at the last second about who's coming out.
Or, the coach can't correct Johnny's mistake when he tells Jimmy to come out instead of Timmy. Because then Jimmy would have to sit a tic.

Sometimes the coach didn't even say until the player is on the court.

Coach: "Get in there!"

player reports, is beckoned, enters

Player: "For who, coach?"

Coach: "_____, get out!"

There will always be exceptions, but in the vast majority of substitutions it's crystal clear. So leave it to the official's judgment - if there's reasonable doubt T the player only - if not, HC gets the indirect as well.

I see what you describe happen occasionally, but not all that often - it just isn't a major issue. If it's occurring repeatedly during a game, then that coach needs to do a better job of communicating with their players. Maybe we need to go back to the days when the incoming sub had to report who they were replacing to the table, or add repeated occurances to the criteria for a DOG warning. There's no reason everyone else should have to stand around waiting because of indecision or inadequate communication on the part of the HC. The onus needs to be put back on the coaches where it belongs.

Works for me.

Works for me too!

Get A Room ...
 

Great. Now let's all sing, "Kumbaya".

You knew it was coming
 

Shut up.

'4-34-3
A player becomes bench personnel after his/her substitute becomes a player or after notification of the coach following his/her disqualification.

There's absolutely NOTHING in the rule regarding him going to the bench or being on the bench.

If the coach is smart enough to know the rule (obviously this one wasn't) then he might be able to pull that off.

You don't have to assume anything. Once that replaced player leaves the floor and we now KNOW he was the replaced player, part of the penalty is that it's an indirect and the coach has to sit. Therefore, we don't have to make a determination on whether he's a player going over to talk to the coach or if he's a replaced player until we get to the penalty enforcement.

PENALTY: Shoot 2 FTs, inform the coach he has to sit and award the ball for a throw-in at the division line.


The sub comes in, the player is walking to the bench, is hit with a T, continues to the bench and sits down. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

My point, which seems to have gotten twisted was that you can't, with 100% certainty, KNOW who the replaced player is until they get to the bench. Yes, they are actually bench personnel once the sub is beckoned, but you can't know for sure until they get to the bench. If you report the T and indicate that it is an indirect T with the player still on the court, you've possible charged an erroneous indirect.

Ahh...but since it isn't a correctable error situation, you can't recind it, right?

(Oops, wrong thread.) :D

There was nothing the OP that said the official called the T, reported it, and informed the coach all before the replaced player reached the bench.

You asked Tim Taylor, "...how do you KNOW that a player walking in the general direction of the bench is the player that is leaving the game."

The OP indicated to us that the T was called on the replaced player. There was nothing in the OP that indicated that the player the T was called in did not go to the bench.

I think that's how Tim Taylor knew the player the T was called on was the replaced player.

Agreed.

That was my entire point...you have to wait to see. The OP said the player was leaving towards the bench but wasn't there yet.

I'm pretty sure he wrote that to explain that the T was definitely received after he had been replaced. Had he not been replaced, he would never have asked the question. :)