Kid quits team during game.

[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.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by Welpe

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.

Could you point me to the rule here so I can find it easier later?? Seems like this may be the most logical way to start the process.

In this situation, with any luck in our corner, the T would be the kid's 5th, and then he'd be disqualified, his sub would shoot, and away we go.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

Could you point me to the rule here so I can find it easier later?? Seems like this may be the most logical way to start the process.

In this situation, with any luck in our corner, the T would be the kid's 5th, and then he'd be disqualified, his sub would shoot, and away we go.

You just don't need all this. The rules weren't written to cover this situation, they were written to address sportsmanship issues. It's just not covered. Use 2-3, hell you can even call a T using 2-3 if you feel the need.

Just bring the sub in to shoot and play on.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

Could you point me to the rule here so I can find it easier later?? Seems like this may be the most logical way to start the process.

8-1-2 clearly says, "Following a time-out or intermission....."

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

In this situation, with any luck in our corner, the T would be the kid's 5th, and then he'd be disqualified, his sub would shoot, and away we go.

It never happens that cleanly.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by 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.

And these discussions are wonderful. It gets us to think about what we would do and when it does happen we have some idea of what our thinking will be.

With all that being said, I cannot think of a single assignor I work for that would not be OK with me or any other official not calling a T for the "leaving the court" portion of the rule. As I said before, I can already realistically see a T for removing the jersey depending on when it took place. But to compound that with a T or any other very suspect penalty, I cannot see me using not using common sense. And I am also comfortable that my experience would be respected as well if I choose not to do so. And until the NF puts out a ruling or the IHSA puts out a ruling suggesting otherwise, I will not penalize such an action for a kid that is quitting the team even in a spectacular way.

Peace

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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



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.



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

Technically, I ejected him for unsporting behavior in the form of throwing equipment.

I just don't agree that we don't have rules covering a player refusing to play. We have a rule for not providing the free thrower. Use it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Technically, I ejected him for unsporting behavior in the form of throwing equipment.

I just don't agree that we don't have rules covering a player refusing to play. We have a rule for not providing the free thrower. Use it.

Even in the dugout you are doing that? I know this is a different sport and I have not picked up a baseball rulebook in months, but I do not see any rules support if they do this outside of the field.

And I disagree with you that the rule applies to this situation at all. So we will just have to disagree on this.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Technically, I ejected him for unsporting behavior in the form of throwing equipment.

I just don't agree that we don't have rules covering a player refusing to play. We have a rule for not providing the free thrower. Use it.

Why? Coach is willing to provide one. There's no need to follow some legalistic rule gymnastics to get there when the rules weren't written for this situation.

The kid is no longer on the team, so use a shooter who is.

This is really, in the end, no different than a coach deciding to play with 4 because his 5th player is suspended.

We had a situation last weekend, H30 gets a T in the freshman game. Didn't play again and was taken out of the following JV game. If the coach had been down to 5 players, incluing 30, and he had told me at the time that #30 was suspended for getting the T, I would have allowed him to play with 4.

We don't decide who's on the team, the coach does.