On what basis did IAABO have to issue that interpretation? There is absolutely nothing in the rules prohibiting extra names being in the book. The IAABO ruling is essentially setting a team up for a technical foul if the player manages to find another way to the game.

Any game played using NFHS or NCAA Rules: A team can always have more names in the book than the number of players they initially have dressed on the bench.

MTD, Sr,

I found this online today. It's from 2009-10:

Play #4 - Before the game the referee notes that there are 11 team members of Team A warming up. However, there are twelve names in the scorebook. When the referee asks the coach about this, he says that one player missed the bus. The referee orders the player's name and number removed from the book stating that an individual must be present to have their name entered in the book. Was the referee correct?

Answer: The referee was NOT correct. Although the definition of team member implies that the individual must be present to be entered in the scorebook, it was not the intent of the NFHS to prohibit the inclusion of individuals in the scorebook who may be late or may not show up. (References: Rule 3.2.1, NFHS Interpretation)

I ask if anyone else is showing up - especially when a team has few players on the court - to prevent handing out technical fouls later on. By the same token, when a scorekeeper - usally a kid - tells me "so and so" isn't going to play so I'm not putting them in, I tell them to put them in the scorebook. You never know what could happen. What if a fight breaks out and kid #14, 15 or even 16 on the bench has to play? To me it's a way of stopping trouble before it starts.

Which brings me back to the scenario of the coach saying "someone is in the locker room." Well, they're not on the bench and they're not in the book so why make touble for ourselves by waiting for this 'phantom' player?

Of course, it doesn't matter what they put in the scorebook, only what they were given by the coach. If the coach gave them a lineup including all the players, then you still wouldn't administer a T later in the game if the late player shows up.

True enough though (SWAG) 85% of the time here, the book is populated by the coach and is what is considered as submitted.

The IAABO interpretation was based on the definition of "team member," which required the person to be in uniform and eligible to become a player. It was a poor interpretation and not enforced for more than a couple of games (if at all) and eventually set aside by the NFHS interp. in 2009.

Please Don't Make Me Look It Up, I Have Over 30 Years Of Refresher Exams On File ...
 

What part of, "Please don't make me go and dig it out of my file", did you not understand. It was only an IAABO interpretation, not a NFHS interpretation, and we, locally, ignored the interpretation for the reason you cited above.

To be honest I can't believe an IAABO Board Interpreter would make such an interpetation. If the interpreter had just asked Peter Webb, he would have set him straight because the NFHS (and NCAA) intepretation is actually an interpretation that goes back to the NBCUSC days, meaning over 50 years.

MTD, Sr.

This was not done by a local board interpreter. As Billy said...it was from (either) an IAABO exam or from a conference call with all IAABO interpreters. I recall when my board interpreter first told us this...and the push back we gave him. But he was following the "One rule, one interpretation" motto from IAABO. It was discussed at length on this forum...where there was ZERO support for this decision. I know that I enforced it for exactly one game. I am sure the NFHS case play from 2009 was a direct result of this IAABO interpretation.

That IAABO ruling from 2005
 

Found it. From 2005. (This is Billy Mac's post.)

Missed The Bus
<hr style="color:#D1D1E1; background-color:#D1D1E1" size="1"> 2005 IAABO Refresher Exam

73) Squad member #45 missed the bus and is not present at the time the squad list and starting lineup must be submitted for team members. During the pregame warm up, the referee counts eleven team members for team A, but while checking the book, team A has twelve team members listed. Referee informs the coach that the squad member who is not present may not be placed in the book, even if he/she will get to the game late. Is the referee correct?

73) Yes: Rule 3, Section 2, Article 1, Rule 4, Section 34, Article 4.

Almost every one in my local board got this question wrong. We disagreed with the answer and citation then, and we still disagree with the answer and citation. If I recall, we got some type of explanation involving the definition of a "team member" involving a squad member being ready and eligible to play.

When I'm the referee, I'm pleased to see that there are more names in the book than there are on the floor during warmups. During the 25 years that I coached middle school basketball, I would put all 14 of my team members' names and numbers, in numerical order, in the book for every game, even if I knew that they would miss the game due to injury or illness.

I coach high school basketball....here is what happened to me earlier this year.

I handed my scorebook to the scorekeeper. During pre-game one of the referees counts that I have 15 in the book, but only 13 in uniform. He makes the scorekeeper cross out (or white out) those kids not in uniform. One of them was injured, but the other was actually sick and I didn't know if he would play or not. Is this right?

Nope

Just tell him one (or two) is in the locker room.

While he's wrong, I wouldn't argue too much. Just report it to your state org for them to deal with after the game.

I didn't argue it... because I wasn't even notified of it. I didn't know about it until after the game when I noticed the names whited out of my book. So I asked my scorekeeper who told me the referee told him to do it. I am going to report it to the state org just so it isn't done again. Thanks for the help.

Be prepared for them to back his move. They may want it enforced that way. If they do, and you're in Colorado, let me know.