Blood Rule Situation
 

Long time reader, but infrequent poster here...

Had an interesting thing happen to me last week during a Varsity Boys game. During the beginning of the 3rd quarter, Home team's star player gets a bloody nose. I correctly direct him to leave the game (and the visual confines of the playing area) to change jerseys, etc. No problems here.

Fast forward to 1:30 remaining in the 4th quarter while visiting team is down 8 and trying to mount a last-minute come back. Home team's star player (from above) gets fouled on a shot and is going to the line to shoot two. As he's walking to the line the visiting coach yells "he's got blood on his shorts!!!"

Sure enough he did have a very small smear of blood on his shorts. First, I felt like an idiot for not noticing during the first time I sent him out - I will definitely look closer next time. Second, I knew that the visiting coach probably knew about the blood all along, but was saving it for the right time. That coach had been complaining all game and this tactic didn't surprise me. I wanted to ignore it/him, but I knew we couldn't disregard the blood rule, so he had to go out again and get a new pair of shorts.

After a sub came in and was standing at the line waiting for the ball, Home coach asks if he could call a timeout and keep his player in the game. I told him that he could not and that the sub had to play :01 before he could come out. After the 2nd made free throw, the player tried to sub in, I again held him up and told him the same thing - that he would have to wait until the clock started.

In hindsight, I think I only did one thing wrong (besides not noticing the the blood on the shorts to begin with) - While the coach was wanting his star player to sub back in and shoot the free throws, I should have clarified that he could have subbed back in for anybody, BUT his sub and that his sub had to shoot the free throws and be in the game until the clock started.

how could I have administered this better? Would anyone have ignored it? Other Thoughts?

Thanks!

1) A TO CAN be used to keep the player in the game. 3-3-7

2) If the player leaves the game, he must remain out until time runs off the clock (with one small non-relevant exception). He can't sub in for a "different" player.

3) Sub does not have play a tic. Only the removed player has to wait for the clock to tick.

Yeah, I knew a TO could have kept him in the game, but he requested one after his replacement was already in the game (though the ball was not yet live) the TO would have to be before his sub come in, right?

Dang - looks like I had it backwards!

Thanks!

Correct.

Once you beckon the sub in its too late for buy-in TO as the sub is now a player.

Well, good news is that I actually administered it correctly... just thought about it too much afterwards and 2nd guessed myself.

From where I sit, you did fine.

You missed a speck of blood? That's hardly poor officiating.

The coach didn't know he could buy his star player back in with a time out before the kid went out? That's not on you, either.

If I have a coach who is clearly exercising gamesmanship over this sort of situation, As I'm telling the other coach that is player has blood on his uniform, I'm probably going to let him know what his options are....."# 32 has blood on his shorts. You can either replace the player or call a timeout and address the blood by the end of timeout the timeout and keep the player in".

Plus one

Around here, we are encouraged to remind the coach of his options when dealing with injury or blood.