Case 3.3.6 Sit D

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

So if the sub (for the injured player) came in "late", would you let the other team counter with a sub? I would, even though it's not an "allowable time to substitute" (or whatever the rule book wording is).

I've thought about this...and decided the rule does not allow this.

If a sub reports at the last second (but before the warning horn), there is no provision for the other team to counter. That is how I am going to handle this.

So I am going to (only) bring in the sub for the injured player...until the NFHS says otherwise.

[Adam]

I'd bring them all in based on the precedent of injured and dq'd players during FTs.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

I've thought about this...and decided the rule does not allow this.

If a sub reports at the last second (but before the warning horn), there is no provision for the other team to counter. That is how I am going to handle this.

So I am going to (only) bring in the sub for the injured player...until the NFHS says otherwise.

I disagree. Before the warning horn both teams have equal opportunity to send subs to the table so it's not the same.

If you were to deny the opposing team to bring in a sub to counter in this situation are you also going deny the opposing team to bring in a 'counter' sub if you had to stop live play due to an injured player?

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I disagree. Before the warning horn both teams have equal opportunity to send subs to the table so it's not the same.

If you were to deny the opposing team to bring in a sub to counter in this situation are you also going deny the opposing team to bring in a 'counter' sub if you had to stop live play due to an injured player?

The rule is different. During a dead ball (which is what you have once you stop play for the injured player) subs can report until the ball is about to become live.

The case play is between quarters...not the last play of the game. I understand your point; there simply is no rule that allows it. There has been a constant refrain at both the NFHS and NCAA to enforce the rules as written and not for individuals to substitute their judgment for the rules. This case book play should have foreseen this problem and answered it.

[Adam]

Sitch:
A1 is injured, coach is beckoned, and decides to use a timeout to keep A1.
After the TO, A1 is not ready, so A6 reports (after the horn) to replace the injured A1.
B coach wants to counter the sudden sub with B6.

It seems to me the ability to offer an uncounterable sub is an advantage not intended by the rules here, so A coach should not be allowed to gain it this way.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It seems to me the ability to offer an uncounterable sub is an advantage not intended by the rules here, so A coach should not be allowed to gain it this way.

There is nothing in the rules that speaks to "countering" subs. If a coach sends a player to the table 16 seconds before a time out ends, that sub comes in but the other team cannot counter because there is no way that sub is going to get there before the warning horn.

You are trying to instill your sense of equity and fairness where the rules don't address it. That is what the rules makers at the high school and college level have been trying to stop for the last few years.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

You are trying to instill your sense of equity and fairness where the rules don't address it. That is what the rules makers at the high school and college level have been trying to stop for the last few years.

No, I'm trying to follow the "Intent and Purpose of the Rules," as the rule book itself states "It is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation."

[Camron Rust]

When an event occurs that allows one sub to enter a game at a time when it would otherwise be disallowed (injury, DQ, etc.), all other subs who have reported are also allowed to enter the game.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

You are trying to instill your sense of equity and fairness where the rules don't address it.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, I'm trying to follow the "Intent and Purpose of the Rules..."

Same old argument, right?

Okay, let's talk consequences. Let's say an official did it BayState's way. Team B's sub would have to wait until the next whistle. After anywhere from 1-40 seconds, he gets in, and the game goes on.

Conversely, let's say an official does it Snaq's way. Team B's sub gets in right away, even though it's clearly after the warning horn. The game goes on.

First question: How much objection would you get either way? My best guess is that Coach B is more likely to object for a player not getting in that Coach A would by letting B's team get a sub in under the circumstances. Of course, this is the least of your worries.

Second question: What would your assigner do (WWYAD)? That depends on your assigner. Is he more of a letter-of-the-law guy, or a "fairness" guy?

Third question: If your assigner did indeed disagree with your choice, how much grief would you get? In the grand scheme of things, you'd be asked, "Oh, remember that thing at intermission where you...?" Philosophies would exchange, but ultimately, we're talking about a single sub during an intermission that's not clearly covered under the rules. I say it falls under minutia, and at worst, you'd get a "don't do it again" if your assigner disagrees with your call.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Same old argument, right?

Well stated.

As officials, we are asked to rule on many things that have minimum consequences to the game (all fashion police items immediately come to mind.) And the rules continually evolve so that something that is forbidden one year is legal the next. The NCAA just changed this rule so that subs after intermission must report by the final horn, not the warning horn. Maybe the NFHS will make that change next year.

Last season I had one game where the scorekeeper sounded the horn as we were starting the second period. She told me that a couple of players on the visiting team had not checked in. The visiting coach had no idea who ended the quarter...but the scorekeeper had written the numbers in the book. Same thing at half-time. By now, the visiting coach was really upset -- and said she had never had this problem before. Well...I had never seen this before, and had never had a scorekeeper so diligent. I surely don't keep track of the numbers of the 10 players who left the court at the end of the quarter. I don't know any official that does.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

The rule is different. During a dead ball (which is what you have once you stop play for the injured player) subs can report until the ball is about to become live.

The case play is between quarters...not the last play of the game. I understand your point; there simply is no rule that allows it. There has been a constant refrain at both the NFHS and NCAA to enforce the rules as written and not for individuals to substitute their judgment for the rules. This case book play should have foreseen this problem and answered it.

If you allow 1 sub in the game shouldn't all properly reported subs be allowed in also?

IOW, once the warning horn sounds no subs should be coming in. It is now discovered that B33 is injured to the point he can't return. Coach B sends his sub to the table. Coach A sees this and sends A35 to the table. What rules basis would we have not allow A35 to enter also?

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What rules basis would we have not allow A35 to enter also?

Rule 3-3-1a.
Casebook 3.3.1 Situation A.

See also Casebook 3.3.1 Situation D, (b) which is nearly identical to the question you ask.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Rule 3-3-1a.
Casebook 3.3.1 Situation A.

See also Casebook 3.3.1 Situation D, (b) which is nearly identical to the question you ask.

Those are normal substitution situations. In the situation we are discussing we are already violating those provisions due to an injury.

Based on "3.3.6 Sit D" I think this is a situation where we as officials need to be proactive. We should be letting the coach know that by the warning horn to begin the next quarter we need to know whether or not the player will still be participating and advise the coach that a sub needs to report by the warning horn if the injured player cannot continue.

If the coach waits until after the warning horn and then sends a sub to the table for the injured player then personally I'm going to allow the other team to sub.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If the coach waits until after the warning horn and then sends a sub to the table for the injured player then personally I'm going to allow the other team to sub.

You are reaching beyond your authority.

Sitch: A1 is injured in the middle of the quarter and the coach is beckoned onto the court. Coach requests and is granted a time out while the trainer tends to the injury. Immediately before the warning horn to end the time out, the coach sends a sub to report for A1. Team B cannot get a sub to the table in time to "counter" this player because the warning horn has sounded.

Are you still going to allow Team B to sub? No. Team A used the rule to properly replace a player. There is no requirement that the sub report any earlier than before the warning horn.