Blood/sub ?

[deecee]

Like I said I agree with APG's earlier assessment assuming the team made a good faith effort at that moment to find a replacement. If one just happens to be found later then by all means. However if it's just for convenience then why do we have to bend? We do enough bending and the rules and the comment says that we do everything possible. It doesn't say that we have to help them rush him back RIGHT away.

coach can use a TO if ITS that imperative. guarantee you it will be done by the end of the TO. I don't want to nor like making changes to the book unless I absolutely have to.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by deecee

Like I said I agree with APG's earlier assessment assuming the team made a good faith effort at that moment to find a replacement. If one just happens to be found later then by all means. However if it's just for convenience then why do we have to bend? We do enough bending and the rules and the comment says that we do everything possible. It doesn't say that we have to help them rush him back RIGHT away.

coach can use a TO if ITS that imperative. guarantee you it will be done by the end of the TO. I don't want to nor like making changes to the book unless I absolutely have to.

Evidently you also don't like to be helpful, cooperative or doing anything that you're not made to. Are you always so stubborn?

Your partners must be thrilled when they see your name on their assignments.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Evidently you also don't like to be helpful, cooperative or doing anything that you're not made to. Are you always so stubborn?

Your partners must be thrilled when they see your name on their assignments.

Partner's name is "Costello."

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Evidently you also don't like to be helpful, cooperative or doing anything that you're not made to. Are you always so stubborn?

Your partners must be thrilled when they see your name on their assignments.

Nice and presumptive off of one case play. Funny how "judgement" outside the rules is applied to reasoning when it best serves one or not. One can make allowances in the spirit of the games as well as jump through flaming hoops. Run your games as you wish I try and keep interpretations out of it when necessary so that expectations are consistent (or in this case inconsistent).

It's like hearing "Oh but the other officials let us."

All I'm saying is that make an allowance but beyond that keep it simple and follow the rule. Most likely if the kid has to change his jersey he has to leave the gym anyway. You going to hold up the game this whole time? He has as much chance to make it to the locker room, if that is where the replacement jersey is to change and be back most likely by the next opportunity to sub in. But you can let them change on the bench since that would speed things up more.

[Camron Rust]

As many have said...a blood change absolves the team from being penalized for players wearing new jerseys. Even if the change is a ripple effect. If they take one from a sub, the rule and reasoning given behind the rules also permit that sub to take a new jersey when one becomes available (perhaps from the lockerroom or team bus).

Remember, we are making them take the shirt off as a result of the blood. The penalties regarding book/number changes are all there to ensure the team fills out the book correctly...nothing else.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

As many have said...a blood change absolves the team from being penalized for players wearing new jerseys. Even if the change is a ripple effect. If they take one from a sub, the rule and reasoning given behind the rules also permit that sub to take a new jersey when one becomes available (perhaps from the lockerroom or team bus).

Remember, we are making them take the shirt off as a result of the blood. The penalties regarding book/number changes are all there to ensure the team fills out the book correctly...nothing else.

Correct and fully supported by the ruling in the case play.
Deecee is unfortunately dead wrong on this one.

[deecee]

well if Nevada is supporting this then I guess for consistency sake I'll change my POV as he is the #1 rule stickler here. Consider me convinced.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by deecee

well if Nevada is supporting this then I guess for consistency sake I'll change my POV as he is the #1 rule stickler here. Consider me convinced.

You were quoted a case play which is intended to clear up or make statements of situations not always clear in the rulebook. That should have been enough right there.

Peace

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by deecee

well if Nevada is supporting this then I guess for consistency sake I'll change my POV as he is the #1 rule stickler here. Consider me convinced.

Nothing in the rule book or case book has changed since thie thread started.