Duties Of The Official Scorekeeper ???
 

The scorer shall:
ART. 1 Keep a record of the names and numbers of players who are to start
the game and of all substitutes who enter the game.
ART. 2 Notify the nearer official when there is an infraction of the rules
pertaining to submission of the roster, substitutions or numbers of players.
ART. 4 Record the field goals made, the free throws made and missed, and
keep a running summary of the points scored.
ART. 5 Record the personal and technical fouls reported on each player and
notify an official immediately when the fifth foul (personal and technical) is
charged to any player, the second technical foul is charged to any team member,
bench personnel, or directly to the head coach, or the third technical foul is
charged to the head coach.
ART. 6 Record the time-out information charged to each team (who and
when) and notify a team and its coach, through an official, whenever that team is
granted its final allotted charged time-out.

Not only can we get information from the scorekeeper about who scores, and commits fouls, we can also get information from the scorekeeper regarding all substitutes who enter the game, free throws missed, and who requests, and is granted, a timeout.

So while a participant is sitting on the bench, can we use any of the scorekeeper's information to "force" an addition to the scorebook and charge a technical foul, like that he was charged with a timeout, that he missed a free throw, or that he was recorded as a substitute who entered the game?

Still Having Fun ???
 

Yes. I'd like to revisit this. Plus I love to quote myself. It makes me feel impotent.

Several have mentioned the idea of using points scored, or fouls committed, to "force" a name, or a number, being added to the scorebook. Why not use the scorekeeper's record of a substitute entering the game? Isn't that enough to charge a technical foul. What's so special about points, and fouls, and not substitutes? If points, and fouls, "trump" the, "No penalty is assessed since No. 25 is not currently in the game" statement in the casebook play, then why not use a record of the player in question being a substitute that entered the game? If we can use any of the information that is supposed to be recored in the scorebook to "trump" the "No penalty assessed" casebook statement, then when would the, "No penalty assessed", statement ever be used?

Man. This is like peeling away the layers of an onion. Anybody else feel like crying?

That's not included because it's assumed the scorer is competent since the referee has already approved him/her and will notify the officials when it's found the player isn't listed.

Be my guest. I think the rest of us are tired of this dead horse.

With chseagle At The Table, This Thread Doesn't Exist ...
 

The problem is is that the scorekeeper in the original post of this thread was a little to slow in informing the officials about the problem. That's what makes this so much fun.

A competent scorekeeper at the table makes the rule really easy to interpret, and, or course, a lot less fun.

If it wasn't for the case play to the contrary, I'd say this would be good enough, along with definite knowledge from the official that the player had played (memories). But I'm not willing to apply the case play to situations that aren't specifically covered by it.

Now, the aroma from this horse is starting to bother my eyes, so I'm going to cease and desist.

A competent scorekeeper makes mistakes just like compentent officials make mistakes.

Now if you are saying a "perfect" scorekeeper would make the case easy, that makes no sense. A perfect scorekeeper would mean there is no need for the case play.

Fixed it for you.

I disagree. The official reported the foul and then granted a timeout. From the OP, it sounds like the scorer informed the official as soon as she could.

Further, there's nothing in the OP that prevents the T from being issued.

Now, really, haven't we beat this to death" Please, let it go.

Either way, I'm done.

But Remember, It's A Timeout, Not An Intermission ...
 

BktBallRef: I agree with your interpretation 100%. Santa Referee will certainly fill your stocking with lots of Fox 40's, Reebok Zigs, and all the concession stand hot dogs that you can eat. Merry Christmas.

So what happens in this case. At the 5 minute mark of the 1st quarter, #10 who's not in the book enters the game. We are notified and access the technical. At the 2 minute mark of the 1st quarter, #35 now enters the game who is also not in the book. This implies that we do not access the technical since we already accessed a book technical when player #10 entered the game. Is that correct?

It's clear in 10-2, Penalty.

Nevadaref, I agree with you, but the rule is the rule. It should be changed in my opinion.

Good thread, we are always learning.