Out of subs, and a DQ

[constable]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Then you tell the coach we're ready to play.

Had a disqualification this past Saturday. NCAA-M rules, so calling official went opposite and I came tableside. Before I even had a chance to finish sentence "Coach, that's 5 on..." the coach already had a sub at the table and says "I know, thanks, that's his sub".

As I beckon the sub on the OPPOSING coach calls his players over and I have tell him "Let's go coach, sub is already in". Definitely caught him off-guard that I wouldn't allow him to huddle.

Doing the championship in a "Small School Showcase" up here a few weeks ago. A player fouls out and the coach says that he wants his timeout. I told the coach he needed to replace the player first. Coach says ok and provides a sub.. I then ask if he wants a 30 or 60 and he flips! He says he doesn't want to use a charged time out he just wants to huddle with his players during the DQ... I inform him why that isn't permissible and off we go but the coach had clearly never heard that rule before... or any other for that matter...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The rules do not address who's allowed to be entered into the book. As JMF stated, sometimes we just over think stuff and get into trouble.
...

Some folks think being a good official means showing everybody how restritive you are:

• Looking for reasons to not allow a sub after a time-out which is followed by free throws
• finding reasons to remove names from the scorebook
• Finding reasons to rule a fouled player as being "on the floor"

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The idea of an IAABO interpretation is just as illogical as the idea of a CBOA interpretation or a Wood Co. Bkb. Off. Assn. interpretation.

What is illogical about this? If there is no clear interpretation of a rule or a situation, and the NFHS case book doesn't cover it, then my local interpreter has to give his/her own interp. That would be the ABC Officials' Org. interpretation. What is illogical about that?

When IAABO makes its exams and they put a screwy question on there that isn't addressed by any NFHS case play, the answer they provide (supposedly for ALL members) is the IAABO interpretation of that play. That's not illogical, that's a fact. It's how they expect their members to call that play.

The fact that those screwy interpretations aren't collected into one IAABO Case Book doesn't imply that they are not still interpretations of those plays.

Every Fall the Rules Editors of the NFHS and NCAA Men's Rules Committees address the Interpreters of the Local Boards of IAABO

As far as I know, the NFHS Rules Editor does not address the interpreters at the Fall conference. I'm on the Executive Committee of my local board and I'm pretty sure (like 100%) I would have heard from my interpreter if Mary had ever been there.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The rules do not address who's allowed to be entered into the book.

They don't? It seems pretty clear to me:

3-2-1: At least 10 minutes before the scheduled starting time, each team
shall supply the official scorer with the name and number of each team member.

4-34-4: A team member is a member of bench personnel who is in uniform
and is eligible to become a player.

Maybe you meant to say that the rules do not address who's not allowed to be entered into the book.

[Texas Aggie]

No subs, no time.

The rule doesn't say that. It assumes there is a replacement. So when there isn't, its a situation that isn't specifically covered, which calls for discretion.

Absent a case ruling, there is no official ruling here. Give them the 20 seconds.

[Adam]

I agree that the rule itself seems to not allow for the time without an actual replacement, but there is room for interpretation here. In the absence of a ruling, go with what your locals say, or your instinct. Personally, I'm not inclined to give him a free time out just because his player fouked out.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm not inclined to give him a free time out just because his player fouked out.

I have no idea what this means, but it made me laugh this morning.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Fouked

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I have no idea what this means.

Wasn't he a running back for the Saint Louis Rams?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Just this one IAABO board (IAABO Board 403, Catawba River (South Carolina) Basketball Officials Association. The interpreter is Paul Behr.

I shot off an email to him. I will let the Forum know if I receive any updated information from him.

If kids wouldn't miss the bus, we wouldn't be having this debate. What's the matter with kids today? We never missed this bus. We walked to all of our games, home, and away, in the snow, in our short shorts, uphill, both ways.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I have no idea what this means, but it made me laugh this morning.

It means my auto correct on the smart phone is getting a little too big for his britches.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I shot off an email to him. I will let the Forum know if I receive any updated information from him.

Here's the email that I sent:

IAABO Board 403 Catawba River (South Carolina) Basketball Officials Association:

I have recently been made aware of an interpretation on the IAABO Board 403 Catawba River (South Carolina) Basketball Officials Association website. It appears under the heading 2009-2010, Plays of the Week, Week 4:

Play #4 - Before the game the referee notes that there are eleven 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)

This rule interpretation appears to be in direct opposition to an interpretation that appeared on the 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.

Here are the citations listed:

3-2-1: At least ten minutes before the scheduled starting time, each team shall supply the official scorer with the name and number of each team member and designate the five starting players. Failure to comply results in a technical foul (see 10-1-1 Penalty).

4-34-4: A team member is a member of bench personnel who is in uniform and is eligible to become a player.

Almost every one in my local board got this question wrong. We disagreed with the answer, and citation, back in 2005, and we still disagree with the answer, and citation. 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. The opposite, more players on the floor than in the book, can, obviously, present problems.

If I recall, IAABO "International" gave us some type of explanation involving the definition of a team member as a squad member being in uniform and eligible to play. My local interpreter disagreed with this interpretation, and locally, we still allow more names in the book than on the floor, but that may not be the correct IAABO "International" interpretation, nor may it be the correct NFHS interpretation. As far as I know, we, here in Connecticut, have never been "officially" informed by IAABO "International", or the NFHS, of any other interpretation. As far as we know, the refresher exam answer still represents the "Law Of The Land", a "Law" that we, under the rational guidance of our local interpreter, have chosen to ignore.

I am not disagreeing with the interpretation on your website. I actually like your interpretation, it "fits" what we're actually doing here in Connecticut. Rather, I would like to know what your IAABO Board 403 Catawba River (South Carolina) Basketball Officials Association interpretation is based on? Have you received a new, i.e., newer than 2005, interpretation from either IAABO "International", or from the NFHS, and if so, could you please share that information with me?

Here's their response:

Regarding this play quite a few questions had been generated to the NFHS about the change that led to the situation where you couldn't have more names on the scorebook roster. As a result the NFHS issued a supplementary case play on their website. This case play never made it to the Case Book. The wording in the answer was lifted directly from that case play.

Anybody got the "supplementary case play" in context?

C'mon Nevadaref. "Now go do that voodoo that you do so well."

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here's their response:

Regarding this play quite a few questions had been generated to the NFHS about the change that led to the situation where you couldn't have more names on the scorebook roster. As a result the NFHS issued a supplementary case play on their website. This case play never made it to the Case Book. The wording in the answer was lifted directly from that case play.

Anybody got the "supplementary case play" in context?

I looked at the NFHS basketball interpretations each year from 2005-06 to 2011-12 and there is no such play.

I searched the NFHS website for a case play with the word "bus" and did not find any.

I don't doubt the IAABO board in South Carolina...but I would really prefer a ruling that includes a date, link, PDF file...anything specific. I am fairly sure this would have been seen by others...including many members of this forum.

The interpretation is fine...and it is the one I am using. But if someone says it comes from a NFHS ruling, I sure would like to see that ruling.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I don't ever remember reading a Casebook Play or Approved Ruling that requires only names of the players who are present to be in the Scorebook. There has never been any rule in the NBCUSC, NFHS, and NCAA Rules Books that have prohibited the number of names in the Scorebook.

MTD, Sr.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I don't ever remember reading a Casebook Play or Approved Ruling that requires only names of the players who are present to be in the Scorebook. There has never been any rule in the NBCUSC, NFHS, and NCAA Rules Books that have prohibited the number of names in the Scorebook.

Yet the IAABO interpreter in South Carolina says there was an NFHS ruling on this subject -- and he used it as the basis for a rules quiz question on his board's web site. But he does not cite a year or anything else.

There has been an IAABO test question on this (as Billy and I have shown.) You say it is wrong. It would not be the first time. I'd just like to see a definitive answer to what seems to be a simple question.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

You say it is wrong.

There seems to be at least one incorrect answer on the IAABO Refresher Exam answer key almost every year. This was not one of them. After most of us on our local board got this incorrect, our local interpreter checked back with IAABO "International" and they stood behind their answer. That was back in 2005. Remember this is an IAABO, not a NFHS, "interpretation".

For you lucky non-IAABO guys, "Move along. There's nothing to see here".

What happens in IAABO, stays in IAABO.