Injured Player/Successive Time Outs

[palmettoref]

I have a question regarding a discussion that we had last night in our meeting. It involves a coach using successive timeouts to have his injured player allowed to stay in the game.

If A1 is injured and the coach request a TO and is granted a TO, A1 is allowed to return as long as he is ready to play at the conclusion of the TO. The discussion last night centered around whether the head coach could call a second TO after the first TO if he thought that A1 needed more time to return ----- successive TO's?
Some guys believe that he is allowed ONLY one TO for A1 to be ready to return to play and if he is not ready to play, then he must be substituted for ---- thus not granting a second TO? I can't find a specific ruling on that and want appreciate your clarification.

[JRutledge]

A player can use as many timeouts that they have in order to get their player into the game. No rules restriction that it only applies to one timeout. Not very likely as timeouts are valuable, but they can call multiple ones legally except when OT is involved.

Peace

[palmettoref]

Thanks JR ..... that was my thought as well but I wanted to get some more clarification!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They can call multiple ones legally except when OT is involved.

Fourth period, 0:00 on clock, game hasn't ended?

[tref]

Originally Posted by palmettoref

The discussion last night centered around whether the head coach could call a second TO after the first TO if he thought that A1 needed more time to return ----- successive TO's?

Some guys believe that he is allowed ONLY one TO for A1 to be ready to return to play and if he is not ready to play, then he must be substituted for ---- thus not granting a second TO? I can't find a specific ruling on that and want appreciate your clarification.

Most made up rules cannot be found. 5-12-3

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by palmettoref

Thanks JR ..... that was my thought as well but I wanted to get some more clarification!

Jeff's opinion is great but it is still just the opinion of an anonymous internet dude. It's not going to carry much weight if you work a game with one of those guys and the situation comes up.

More useful is knowing the exact rule(s) that would cover this situation and being on the ready with input.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Jeff's opinion is great but it is still just the opinion of an anonymous internet dude. It's not going to carry much weight if you work a game with one of those guys and the situation comes up.

More useful is knowing the exact rule(s) that would cover this situation and being on the ready with input.

Hey, I resemble that remark.

I do totally agree with you BTW.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Fourth period, 0:00 on clock, game hasn't ended?

Right, Jeff worded it slightly incorrectly, in that OT really isn't a factor; but the expiration of time in the fourth quarter or OT is what prevents successive TOs.

[PAULK1]

Rule 3-3-7 & casebook 3.3.7C both say that the player must be ready to play by the end of the TO. As with any other required sub situations any further TO's should not be granted until all required substitutions are completed.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

Right, Jeff worded it slightly incorrectly, in that OT really isn't a factor; but the expiration of time in the fourth quarter or OT is what prevents successive TOs.

Well that does involve OT, it just is not the actual wording of the rule, that is true. Then again something told me that folks would point this out.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well that does involve OT, it just is not the actual wording of the rule, that is true. Then again something told me that folks would point this out.

Peace

It's what we do around here.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by PAULK1

Rule 3-3-7 & casebook 3.3.7C both say that the player must be ready to play by the end of the TO. As with any other required sub situations any further TO's should not be granted until all required substitutions are completed.

While it may not be the intended meaning of the rule, both the rule book and case book do seem to agree with you as they talk about the timeout in singular form....seeming to mean they only get one timeout to have the player ready to continue. If not, the player must be replaced.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by PAULK1

Rule 3-3-7 & casebook 3.3.7C both say that the player must be ready to play by the end of the TO. As with any other required sub situations any further TO's should not be granted until all required substitutions are completed.

3.3.7 SITUATION C: Officials discover blood on players A1 and B1 simultaneously
and direct both players to leave the game. After notification by the officials,
(a) Team A chooses to call a time-out to keep A1 in the game, while Team B elects
to substitute B6 for B1; (b) both teams request a time-out to keep A1 and B1 in
the game. RULING: In (a), B6 must enter the game prior to the official granting
the time-out for Team A. A1 must be ready to play by the end of the time-out. B1
may not re-enter the game until the next opportunity to substitute after time has
run off the clock. In (b), both teams are charged a time-out and the time-outs run
concurrently. If one team requests a 60-second time-out and the other a 30, the
duration shall be 60 seconds. Both A1 and B1 must be ready to play by the end
of the time-out.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While it may not be the intended meaning of the rule, both the rule book and case book do seem to agree with you as they talk about the timeout in singular form, seeming to mean they only get one timeout to have the player ready to continue. If not, the player must be replaced.

I'm not sure that I agree with this. I hope that Forum members continue the discussion to either confirm, or deny, this.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

It's what we do around here.

Yep, it's the new, improved, never off topic threads, never off topic posts, never off topic images, never off topic videos, Basketball Forum, with 50% more fact checkers, and a new easy to use format. And it comes with a money back guarantee.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

3.3.7 SITUATION C: Officials discover blood on players A1 and B1 simultaneously
and direct both players to leave the game. After notification by the officials,
(a) Team A chooses to call a time-out to keep A1 in the game, while Team B elects
to substitute B6 for B1; (b) both teams request a time-out to keep A1 and B1 in
the game. RULING: In (a), B6 must enter the game prior to the official granting
the time-out for Team A. A1 must be ready to play by the end of the time-out. B1
may not re-enter the game until the next opportunity to substitute after time has
run off the clock. In (b), both teams are charged a time-out and the time-outs run
concurrently. If one team requests a 60-second time-out and the other a 30, the
duration shall be 60 seconds. Both A1 and B1 must be ready to play by the end
of the time-out.



I'm not sure that I agree with this. I hope that Forum members continue the discussion to either confirm, or deny, this.

Both rules (3-3-6,7) and (5-11-7) I believe were implemented to prevent lengthy delays by using successive time outs (1) to allow an injured player to return to action and (2) to keep a player from shooting crucial free throw(s) when the fourth quarter or OT period has ended. It would have been nice if it were added to 5-11-7..."or to extend the time needed to get an injured player ready" but 3-3-6,7 already says "unless a time-out" (singular) is granted..."and the situation can be corrected by the end of the time-out." (singular)