Out of subs, and a DQ

[Toren]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes, it does (in my reading at least). No subs, no time. It's not a "time out", it's a "replacement interval".

But who would know with certainty if they had any eligible subs? Couldn't the coach still add a player at the cost of a Technical? I say give the time, coach says no subs are available and we move on. Or coach says, I want to add a player to the book and go from there.

While I agree that the time is there for a replacement, who cares what the coach is really using that time for? In most cases the coach doesn't need 20 seconds and they know who the sub is prior to us starting the clock. But they almost always bring their kids over and have a quick word, then finally send the kid in to sub. JMO

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Toren

But who would know with certainty if they had any eligible subs? Couldn't the coach still add a player at the cost of a Technical? I say give the time, coach says no subs are available and we move on. Or coach says, I want to add a player to the book and go from there.

The few times this has happened, we knew the team was out. They started with 6 (or 7 or 8) and fouled out 2 (or 3 or 4). It's not rocket science.

And, if a player is added to the book, then s/he is in the game, and the "replacement interval" is over. OF course, the coach can talk to the team while the FTs are being shot.

[JetMetFan]

Here's NFHS 10-5-2:

The head coach shall replace or remove a disqualified/injured player, or player directed to leave the game, within 20 seconds when a substitute is available.

and NCAA 10-4-5/10-6-2g

The head coach shall replace a disqualified or injured player within 20
seconds when a substitute is available.

It's in the penalty section but both codes specify replacing a disqualified player when a substitute is available.

I had this happen in a D-3 game last season. The home team had five players. One fouled out about 10 minutes into the second half. The coach asked for the 20 seconds and the official closest to her said "no, you don't have any subs" and we played on. I know we want to be charitable at times but there really isn't any gray area given the way the rule is written. Besides, we're just opening up a can of worms in terms of dealing with the other coach.

As for the coach potentially saying there's another player in the locker room, let's think: before the game don't we tell the scorekeeper to write down the name of anyone who might show up/play? I know I do. In that game where the team had five players we asked beforehand if they thought anyone else would show. What I'm saying is a response like "there's another player in the locker room" shouldn't even be on the table. We should know if someone has a chance of showing up.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

.....let's think: before the game don't we tell the scorekeeper to write down the name of anyone who might show up/play?

Gotta give a resounding no on this one.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Gotta give a resounding no on this one.

There was actually an IAABO (not NFHS) refresher exam question on this about ten years ago. Please don't make me go and dig it out of my file, but is was something about a player missing the bus, and on route to the game. The IAABO (not NFHS) interpretation to this question was that the player's name was not to be written in the book. 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 interpretation.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There was actually an IAABO (not NFHS) refresher exam question on this about ten years ago. Please don't make me go and dig it out of my file, but is was something about a player missing the bus, and on route to the game. The IAABO (not NFHS) interpretation to this question was that the player's name was not to be written in the book. 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 interpretation.

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.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Welpe

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.

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.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

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.

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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Welpe

On what basis did IAABO have to issue that interpretation?

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.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There was actually an IAABO (not NFHS) refresher exam question on this about ten years ago. Please don't make me go and dig it out of my file, but is was something about a player missing the bus, and on route to the game. The IAABO (not NFHS) interpretation to this question was that the player's name was not to be written in the book. 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 interpretation.

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?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

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.

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.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

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)

JetMetFan: Thanks for finding, and posting this. I would love to see it in context. Conference call? Mid-season interpretation? Is this in Nevadaref's archives? Can you post the link where you found it?

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JetMetFan: Thanks for finding, and posting this. I would love to see it in context. Conference call? Mid-season interpretation? Is this in Nevadaref's archives? Can you post the link where you found it?

Here's the link:
2009-2010 Week 4

It is from an IAABO board in South Carolina.