Kid quits team during game.

[just another ref]

Guy toss around 2-3 too easily sometimes, but this is truly an extraordinary circumstance. Kid takes off his jersey, throws it at the coach, and leaves.
Have a brief conversation with the coach.

"What just happened, coach?"

"The kid is a head case. He's done."

"Very well. His last act associated with the team was the removal of the jersey on the court. T for that. Now let's have a sub and we will proceed as if he never existed."

jmo

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I tell the coach he's welcome to suspend him once he's no longer a player, but in the mean time I need him to shoot free throws.

Go for it. I won't.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Why would I? The rule allows for the substitution in the case of injury, but it doesn't allow substitution in the case of the coach doesn't want him in the game anymore. I don't see why that's hard to grasp.

Yes and if they fake the injury that would be circumventing the rule too with the same result. The same thing applies here. We have a kid refusing to play because he is upset with coach or team. Sorry, that is you injecting yourself into something that is not covered by the rules and I cannot imagine the rules makers considering this as why they created the rule. The rule was put into place for disgust with us or opponents. I do not see why that is so hard to grasp for you either?

Peace

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Right thing maybe but in the wrong way. Nothing is lost by the coach nailing his but to the bench at the next substitution opportunity and we don't break any rules doing it that way.

So the kid shoots his free throw and misses the last one. Play resumes and during the next possession, this kid knocks out one of his teammates with a sucker punch. What do you do then?

I know this is a bizarre scenario, but whatever this kid does in the game after the coach tells you he has suspended the kid from the team and YOU forced him to play - that's on you.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Are you in the habit of allowing coaches to substitute for free throwers?

This isn't soccre where we're dealing with habitually deceptive behavior perpetuated on international television.

When coaches get in the habit of suspending players in the middle of games just as a poor shooter is about to shoot free throws, I'll rethink my position and I'm sure Smitty and Rut will as well.

Mean time, I'm not about to tell a coach which players are on his team.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Guy toss around 2-3 too easily sometimes, but this is truly an extraordinary circumstance. Kid takes off his jersey, throws it at the coach, and leaves.
Have a brief conversation with the coach.

"What just happened, coach?"

"The kid is a head case. He's done."

"Very well. His last act associated with the team was the removal of the jersey on the court. T for that. Now let's have a sub and we will proceed as if he never existed."

jmo

I'm not bothering with the last one, but this situation is going to be rare enough that none of us will likely ever have it twice.

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I disagree, the rules lay out how and when a player may be substituted, and this isn't an allowable situation.

I disagree. He is injured. Mentally injured.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Smitty

So the kid shoots his free throw and misses the last one. Play resumes and during the next possession, this kid knocks out one of his teammates with a sucker punch. What do you do then?

I know this is a bizarre scenario, but whatever this kid does in the game after the coach tells you he has suspended the kid from the team and YOU forced him to play - that's on you.

This is assuming the player isn't half way down the hallway and out of the gym. What do we do then? Have the school police officer bring him back in handcuffs and shoot the freethrows under threat of arrest?

This situation goes way outside what happens within the confines of the game and I believe should be dealt with outside the confines of the game.

[stiffler3492]

What are you going to tell the opposing coach, then, when he puts up a stink about the kid leaving the floor?

That's, of course, assuming he knows the rule, or is at least familiar with it.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

I disagree. He is injured. Mentally injured.

Fine by me, just tell me that he's injured. But a coach saying "No, I don't want to." Isn't good enough here.

Look, from the start I haven't said to keep him in the game; I said get him disqualified. Unfortunately, in basketball, there's no way to disqualify a player that isn't going to give free throws to the other team.

I've literally had this happen to me during a baseball game. In the middle of an inning the catcher left home plate chucked his helmet into the dugout and went outside the fence declaring he was done. So I obliged him and tossed him. He was in fact made at his coach (dad).

By all means, get rid of the kid, just do it by the rules.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

What are you going to tell the opposing coach, then, when he puts up a stink about the kid leaving the floor?

That's, of course, assuming he knows the rule, or is at least familiar with it.

I am going to assume that a head coach with any common sense will get over it. Not all coaches that know the rules expect us to be overly technical (just look at our uniform issues, many stories of coaches not taking the FTs). Actually I have seen many coaches that know a rule and insist it not be enforced.

Peace

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

What are you going to tell the opposing coach, then, when he puts up a stink about the kid leaving the floor?

That's, of course, assuming he knows the rule, or is at least familiar with it.

That the intent of the rule is to show disgust with an official's call and this was not directed at the officials and then I'm done with the conversation.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Fine by me, just tell me that he's injured. But a coach saying "No, I don't want to." Isn't good enough here.

So he has to lie to you when there is evidence the player clearly walked out?

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Look, from the start I haven't said to keep him in the game; I said get him disqualified. Unfortunately, in basketball, there's no way to disqualify a player that isn't going to give free throws to the other team.

Actually there is. That is why we have 2-3 in the first place. Nothing in the rule covers what happens if a player refuses to play the game.

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I've literally had this happen to me during a baseball game. In the middle of an inning the catcher left home plate chucked his helmet into the dugout and went outside the fence declaring he was done. So I obliged him and tossed him. He was in fact made at his coach (dad).

By all means, get rid of the kid, just do it by the rules.

So you ejected a would do or say nothing, but walked off the field? Not sure you have rules support if that is the case where a kid just walks off the field and never comes back. Of course if he does something to get ejected that is different. But we have a kid that leaving the game and court and we have an idea why. I can sleep well at night knowing I just got a sub and we moved on.

Peace

[stiffler3492]

I understand "the intent of the rule" argument.

While this situation will probably never happen to any of us, it's certainly fostered some good discussion.

What I keep getting hung up on, though, is the resumption of play. We've theorized getting a sub, putting the ball down and starting to count, etc.

While this exact situation is not necessarily covered in the rules/cases, I'm still inclined to use the "leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason" reference to give a T. That way, we're at least following the rules to some extent.

I don't have my books in front of me, but I suppose what could follow, if the kid won't come back on the floor, is a DOG warning? I don't know, I'm just trying to come up with a logical way to continue the game.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

What I keep getting hung up on, though, is the resumption of play. We've theorized getting a sub, putting the ball down and starting to count, etc.

You can't put the ball down / use the RPP (same this in this situation) because the freethrows are not following a timeout or intermission. Normally if a team refuses to provide a shooter in this case, it's a T to the player if he refuses.

While this exact situation is not necessarily covered in the rules/cases, I'm still inclined to use the "leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason" reference to give a T.

Why do you think a T is needed here? This has gone so far outside the bounds of the game that I'm not sure a T actually solves anything.

I don't have my books in front of me, but I suppose what could follow, if the kid won't come back on the floor, is a DOG warning? I don't know, I'm just trying to come up with a logical way to continue the game.

Can't have a DOG warning either.

The most logical way to treat this IMO is to use 2-3, treat the player as gone and get a sub in. Give a T for removing the jersey or leaving the floor if you must but I'd be inclined not to.