Kid quits team during game.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

See Bob's post, #2 in this thread, and in the rulebook, 10-3-6i. Looks like it may have been added in as of 2010-11

Bob was joking.

10-3-6i, "to demonstrate resentment, disgust, or intimidation." While I think you could get him for taking off his jersey, I'm not getting him for leaving the court if it's obvious to everyone that he's quitting. For that matter, if that's obvious when he takes his jersey off (a big if), then as far as I'm concerned he's no longer on the team.

The rules weren't written with this scenario in mind, so you have to use common sense if it ever comes up. Just get a replacement player and move on. Sure, by rule, you can come up with at least 2, probably more, technical fouls to call; you could probably even justify sticking the coach with 10-5-5. But why?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

But why?

Because we don't have a mechanism for allowing a free thrower to just quit in the rules and we shouldn't allow the team to benefit from his insolence.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Because we don't have a mechanism for allowing a free thrower to just quit in the rules and we shouldn't allow the team to benefit from his insolence.

So you're only going to call a T if the quitting player is due to shoot free throws?

As Rut pointed out, the chance of the situation actually happening is so minimal the rules don't really address it. You don't need a mechanism; just let the sub shoot. If you feel so strongly that coach A might be trying to play a game, call the T. Or you could simply let coach B pick the shooter (stretching 2-3).

Personally, if I know from the start that the player is quitting, I'm just going to consider the player no longer eligible and let the sub shoot.

Let's change it slightly: A1 is due free throws. Coach calls timeout. After the timeout, coach informs you that A1 is suspended for something he said to the coach in the TO.

What do you do?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So you're only going to call a T if the quitting player is due to shoot free throws?

No, I'm calling the T on any player, but I can see trying to get out of it with a non-shooter.

As Rut pointed out, the chance of the situation actually happening is so minimal the rules don't really address it. You don't need a mechanism; just let the sub shoot. If you feel so strongly that coach A might be trying to play a game, call the T. Or you could simply let coach B pick the shooter (stretching 2-3).

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

Personally, if I know from the start that the player is quitting, I'm just going to consider the player no longer eligible and let the sub shoot.

But you can't know what the player's doing. You have no way of distinguishing a fit of pique that will be over in a minute from a kid who is hanging up his sneakers for all time. Since we can't know otherwise, we have to treat him as what the rules see him: a player who is required to shoot free throws.

Let's change it slightly: A1 is due free throws. Coach calls timeout. After the timeout, coach informs you that A1 is suspended for something he said to the coach in the TO.

What do you do?

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.

My experience in soccer colors my opinion here. I've seen all kinds of crazy things done in an attempt to avoid yellow cards from tying shoes to faking serious injuries (we aren't supposed to give cards to players who are on the ground injured, which causes players to think if they stay on the ground long enough they won't get a card). If you want off the court, fine. But you're going to have to do it legally or accept the consequences.

[Smitty]

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.

Really???

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Smitty

Really???

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

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

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

Not in the habit, no. But if a coach tells me he tossed a kid from the team for his behavior, I'm not undercutting the coach by forcing him to let the kid play. I'm not sure how I'd proceed, but I would not force the coach's hand when he's trying to send the right message to his team.

[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.

[JRutledge]

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.

So if he tells you he is injured are you going to require a doctor's note or evaluation first too?

Peace

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So if he tells you he is injured are you going to require a doctor's note or evaluation first too?

Peace

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.

Originally Posted by Smitty

Not in the habit, no. But if a coach tells me he tossed a kid from the team for his behavior, I'm not undercutting the coach by forcing him to let the kid play. I'm not sure how I'd proceed, but I would not force the coach's hand when he's trying to send the right message to his team.

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.

[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.

[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 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.

[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.