Where's APG at?
 

NFHS Rules: What would we have HERE if this was following

1) a time-out?
2) a substitution where the player returning to the court in the middle of the play thought he had been substituted for?

(other than three officials that didn't count to 5 twice)

1) Team Technical for failing to have all players return at approximately the same time following a timeout.

2) Off the top of my head, I don't think we have anything. I need to consult the books.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KjxSmM30W8A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Correct...but I dislike it.

One of the two situations should be changed such that they are consistent.....either both a T or neither a T. I see no good reason why it should be a T to get confused about who should be in after a timeout versus a substitution at any other time.

Did a little digging in the casebook and came up with this:

10.3.2 SITUATION B:

After a lengthy substitution process involving multiple substitutions for both Team A and Team B, A5 goes to the bench and remains there, mistakenly believing he/she has been replaced. The ball is put in play even though Team A has only four players on the court. Team A is bringing the ball into A's frontcourt when the coach of Team A realizes they have only four players. The coach yells for A5 to return and he/she sprints directly onto the court and catches up with the play.

RULING: No technical foul is charged to A5. A5's return to the court was not deceitful, nor did it provide A5 an unfair positioning advantage on the court.


I'm not sure if I'm reading too much into the ruling but it seems that if there was some advantage gained by the player coming back onto the court, we could potentially assess a technical foul. Is that the case and if so, could we apply it here? The player did seem to gain an advantage by materializing right next to an unsuspecting ball handler.

That's what I'm wondering here. White kept the ball because of the OB violation on blue, but what if they hadn't? What if it had been a steal or hit off white's foot and then OB? Pretty clearly a T then, right? Or is the fact that the blue player disrupted the offense's play enough to say they gained an advantage even in this situation?

Will you all leave my man alone!!!! Give the man a break, he cannot do this every time we see a play on TV (well maybe he can but then again I did not use blue font).

Peace

APG is a font of a video knowledge. :D

I think the fact that the player came from behind the player and affected the play, and was able to do so because the offensive player did not have reason to expect he could be there...I think it's a T no matter what.

Part of this was an inside joke BTW.
 

We treat the poor man like he is at the Bunny Ranch and we can just call his name and he comes running. :D

Peace

Funny thing is I was looking at the clip of this video about 20 minutes before it was posted. :p

I am trying to help you out here man. You are not helping!!!! :D

Peace

Bunny Ranch...lol!

See! He was already on the job. :p

I agree that the rules should be consistent. I think that BOTH should be changed, and the team should play with four until either the next opportunity to sub or the ball becomes dead (that is, I'd like either of those to be the rule; we obviously couldn't have both).

He's an NBA vide-ho. :D