Sub question

[Adam]

I agree, just thinking. A coach would normally have up to ten on the bench. If he strings them out just right, he can get about a minute out of it.

Some coach somewhere has to think of this sometime.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree, just thinking. A coach would normally have up to ten on the bench. If he strings them out just right, he can get about a minute out of it.

Some coach somewhere has to think of this sometime.

If he strings them out, they're not all getting in. The 2nd one wasn't at the table in time to be beckoned in with the first one so they have to wait until the next opportunity to sub...at least not the way we're told to do it here.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If he strings them out, they're not all getting in. The 2nd one wasn't at the table in time to be beckoned in with the first one to they have to wait until the next opportunity to sub...at least not the way we're told to do it here.

Wasn't there a ruling or interpretation that actually we only were supposed to allow subs that were all at the table at the same basic time? I hate old rulings that do not show up in current casebook plays, but I almost sure I remember where the 10 different substitutes was not what we were supposed to allow in the first place.

Peace

[dsqrddgd909]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

But, it's better than a picture of a sub sandwich or whatever else might have been posted.

Hearty laugh at that one. Thanks for the good start to my day.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If he strings them out, they're not all getting in. The 2nd one wasn't at the table in time to be beckoned in with the first one to they have to wait until the next opportunity to sub...at least not the way we're told to do it here.

We (I) haven't been told that. I've obviously never had a string of ten, but I have seen three or four strung out.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Wasn't there a ruling or interpretation that actually we only were supposed to allow subs that were all at the table at the same basic time? I hate old rulings that do not show up in current casebook plays, but I almost sure I remember where the 10 different substitutes was not what we were supposed to allow in the first place.

Peace

I'd like to see that. It makes sense.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

I've obviously never had a string of ten, but I have seen three or four strung out.

We've been told to deny entry to substitutes who are not at the "X" when the administering official is "about ready" (my words, I'm at work, no books) to make the ball live (disposal of inbounder, or free thrower).

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

We've been told to deny entry to substitutes who are not at the "X" when the administering official is "about ready" (my words, I'm at work, no books) to make the ball live (disposal of inbounder, or free thrower).

That's how I do it, but if A6 subs in, I'm not going to be ready until A1 is close to his bench. After A6 comes in, as A1 is walking towards his bench, A7 reports. A2 then slowly walks to his bench. Then A8 reports.

Rinse and repeat.

[jritchie]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

And, Bob, time expiring with FT's remaining doesn't preclude the opportunity to substitute. It may not make any sense, but I know of no rules that prohibit it.

don't we usually send them to their bench area when time expires while we are shooting free throws? So why should we allow a sub?

What about time expiring at the end of the game where FT's are going to be shot? We going to allow a time out to ice shooter? How many TO's can they call? to "ice the shooter"

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jritchie

Don't we usually send them to their bench area when time expires while we are shooting free throws? So why should we allow a sub?

Good question. But answer me this, why wouldn't we allow a substitute? Citation please.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jritchie

What about time expiring at the end of the game where FT's are going to be shot? We going to allow a time out to ice shooter? How many TO's can they call? to "ice the shooter"?

One. No successive time outs allowed in this situation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by jritchie

don't we usually send them to their bench area when time expires while we are shooting free throws? So why should we allow a sub?

What about time expiring at the end of the game where FT's are going to be shot? We going to allow a time out to ice shooter? How many TO's can they call? to "ice the shooter"

While they may go to the bench area and we may allow them to do so, the rules actually require that those other players remain on the court and that the other team members remain on the bench until the FTs are done. The game isn't over and all the rules still apply....even substitute rules.

[jritchie]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Good question. But answer me this, why wouldn't we allow a substitute? Citation please.

Courtesy to the shooter! No citation that I have found, but if I'm going to send the players to the bench area because time has expired, while we shoot the FT's, could we call them all bench personnel now and not have to bring in subs?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jritchie

Could we call them all bench personnel now and not have to bring in subs?

Officials beckon substitutes all the time during intermissions. Sometimes substitutes report, and are beckoned, at the beginning of the intermission, more commonly they report, and are beckoned, right before the warning buzzer sounds. Except for when they report after the warning buzzer, when they report, we beckon them into the game. Are we wrong to do that?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Officials beckon substitutes all the time during intermissions. Sometimes substitutes report, and are beckoned, at the beginning of the intermission, more commonly they report, and are beckoned, right before the warning buzzer sounds. Except for when they report after the warning buzzer, when they report, we beckon them into the game. Are we wrong to do that?

IMO, yes, you are wrong. Just let them report and go back to the huddle. It's up to the scorer to tell you who is (or should be) in the game once the next quarter starts.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes, you are wrong. Just let them report and go back to the huddle. It's up to the scorer to tell you who is (or should be) in the game once the next quarter starts.

So we beckon these substitutes during a timeout, but not during an intermission?

Mechanically, this does make some sense. In a Connecticut two person game, during a timeout there is an official on the division line, either on the table side jump ball circle, or on the far side jump ball circle, who is obviously there to beckon substitutes. During intermissions, the official on the division line is all the way over on the far side sideline.

If they report, and are not beckoned, as in an intermission, where all players are bench personnel, has there been substitution, or has there been no substitution?