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.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I think that the coach should have twenty seconds to instruct his players on how his team will play four against five. I'm not sure the rules back me up, but I'm also not 100% sure that they don't, I'm just 99% sure that they don't.

The NFHS ruled on this via POE or interp about four years ago.
I can't remember exactly where the ruling appeared.
It was: No sub available = no replacement period
Just get the game underway after removing the DQ'd player.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I think that the coach should have twenty seconds to instruct his players on how his team will play four against five. I'm not sure the rules back me up, but I'm also not 100% sure that they don't, I'm just 99% sure that they don't.

Is that the point of a timeout?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by tjones1

If I were the coach I'd say I have an available sub in the locker room putting his shoes on... then say he's become sick and is no longer available.

Meaning he isn't getting a free 20 second TO.

MTD, Sr.

[Ignats75]

There's a mechanism available if a coach wants to talk to his team. ITS CALLED A TIMEOUT. By letting him steal a 30, gives him an unfair advantage and makes us look like we are playing favorites.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by Ignats75

There's a mechanism available if a coach wants to talk to his team. ITS CALLED A TIMEOUT. By letting him steal a 30, gives him an unfair advantage and makes us look like we are playing favorites.

So do you not let the coach talk to his players throughout the game? And when did a replacement interval become 30 seconds?

And why would the other team not be able to talk to their players during this interval? This would be the only reason that it would look like favorites. The referee's just called a foul that disqualified a player, I doubt anyone will say "Man that referee sure does like that team, they keep calling fouls on them."

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS ruled on this via POE or interp about four years ago.
I can't remember exactly where the ruling appeared.
It was: No sub available = no replacement period
Just get the game underway after removing the DQ'd player.

What if the coach simply takes the 20 seconds and *then* informs you that he has no replacement?

[Nevadaref]

If the official isn't aware that no replacements are available, then that is a slightly different situation.
You can only act upon what you know.
Most coaches will quickly say, "I don't have anyone else" or something similar.
When you learn that, you resume play immediately.
Now it may be the case that a player was injured earlier in the contest and the coach may go see if he can return at this time. I have no problem allowing for some time for him to determine that.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I can't remember exactly where the ruling appeared.

What? How can this be? The Nevadaref that we have all come to know, and love, used to be the "King of the Archived Interpretations".

[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.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What? How can this be? The Nevadaref that we have all come to know, and love, used to be the "King of the Archived Interpretations".

I've had a nasty illness for the past two weeks, just getting back to normal.
I'll have to use that as my excuse for being unable to pinpoint some rulings recently.
I'll be fine by the time that I take the court for postseason.

[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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'll have to use that as my excuse for being unable to pinpoint some rulings recently. I'll be fine by the time that I take the court for postseason.

Just in case you had better carry a casebook in your back pocket. An added bonus, you can switch the casebook from pocket to pocket to help keep track of the possession arrow.