Timekeeper sneaking in subs
 

One more from my strange day at the tiny MS:

In the last minute, and with the game out of reach, a team scores. I'm the L, new T, and I hear the horn. Subs from both teams come into the game, with the clock stopped. I go to the timekeeper and ask what the horn was for, and she replies, "to get the subs in."

I'm not impressed with this, but I see no point in fussing. It's middle school, the last minute, kids want to play, and it would take only more time denying the subs or speaking with the timekeeper about it. Besides, I think the timekeeper was conned into it by a coach or scorekeeper.

Let's say this happened in a varsity game. How would you handle it? Deny the subs? Technical fouls? (Bear in mind, no-one ever beckoned them.) Charge time-outs to each team? Just let it go?

College game = easy "nope." HS game = yuck.

...clock should not have stopped after a FG.


Have a talk with the timekeeper, and yes, in a Varsity game the timekeeper is going to get spoken to. (If we don't instruct them the correct way...then our fellow officials will probably have to deal with it in the futrure)

No I would not give T's...No I would not charge TO's to either team...and No I would not deny subs.

For a MS game...I would probably "just let it go" as you did...then speak to the timer after the game. (Maybe) ;)

In a varsity game if a horn sounded at an inappropriate time and subs ran out without being beckoned, yes, I would T them all up.

In a jr. high game with the outcome decided and time winding down, I have been known to stop the game myself just to let the subs in.

...sure you would. :p

(BTW...have you ever actually had a sub run out without being beckoned?)

Answer: Of course you have...and I'd bet a dollar to a doughnut you have not T'd EVERY one of them.

Never Say Never ...
 

With a dead ball, and the clock stopped, send them back to the table, and then beckon them in.

My shoelace became untied in that case! Ooops! :p

Misty Water Color Memories ...
 

Without the horn, as in the original post, I used to do this to let these kids get in the game. Several years ago, I had a veteran official advise me to just blow the whistle and get them in the game.

Full disclosure: I was the twelfth player on a twelve man freshman basketball team. There were a few games where I was at the table (no X back then) waiting to get into the game to see the clock run all the way down to zero.

If a team is up 30 with 2 minutes left and subs are at the table. As soon as someone scores I am stopping play and getting them in. High School or Junior High.

That's not really your decision. Any other rules you'd break because it's a blow out?

Never had a problem with it. Never had a coach question it, in fact they say thank you.

I'm glad it works for you. No way in h-e-hockey sticks I'd go against the rule.

Doesn't make it right.

It's expected in some areas, and even encouraged. In the end, who really cares?

Heh.

My partner made up a travel on a team winning by 50+ earlier this season to get a sub in. Right in front of me. When I looked up confused, both he and the winning coach (partner was standing next to him) were laughing in my direction. Coach told partner it was the best call he made that night. He had plenty of timeouts left, but didn't want to further embarrass the losing team.

Middle school? I'm bringing the subs in without a second thought.

If those areas feel that way, they're welcome to amend their rules to allow for it, but I'm willing to bet they haven't. Which means that a referee doing this is blatantly and intentionally failing to conduct the game according to its rules. That's a lack of integrity on the part of the official. What's next? Phantom travel calls?

If a coach wants his players in the game after a basket, he can call a timeout.

In a varsity game? This.

Lack of integrity? Good grief.

This isn't some moral high road you're on. Let me seize do you start counting three seconds as soon as 55 gets his foot into the paint?

And the last thing anyone wants with two minutes left in a 30 point game is a timeout.

All I can say is where I am, it happens all the time. I have seen many officials do it, and never seen anyone question it.

You must've read my post.

The only thing that resulted from that was a lot of laughter and a kid getting into a 50+ point blowout.

In other words, lighten up Francis.

Do you make a coach stay in the box at all times? Do you start your 3 second count as soon as someone puts a foot in the lane?

Despite the pushback Eastshire is getting, I think he makes a valid point here. Many a coach has spent a timeout just to get someone in (his team or opponent's), looked at me, and said, "that's all I want." Quick, easy, and painless. I don't think that's too much to ask, and I don't see how it embarrasses anyone.

While I agree a coach could call for a timeout, I'd rather they didn't as long as the rule requires both coaches agree in order to shorten a timeout.

And the idea of requiring it seems to me a bit overly officious.

The only problem I have with blowing the play dead after a basket, to let subs in, is that there is no published guide.

Some officials will do it, some won't.

Of those that will do it, what constitutes a blow out is different between officials. (Assuming this is not done in a close game.)

The only way to be fair is to say that it will be done within a matching time and/or score constraint. Example: within the last 4 minutes and at least a 20-point spread.

It's like <s>corn</s>, the judge knows it when he sees it.

And it's really no different than changing your travel filter.

So in Jr. High game, you will have parents volunteering on the clock/board and wouldn't worry about it too much. If it is happening at a higher level game with staff working the clock, I would address with the timer. But by rule you would have to bring them in. In NCAA rules you would not bring in subs on an inadvertent whistle or timing mistake inside of 1 minute.

I've been known to ask BOTH coaches as a I run by if they want the subs in. If they both say yes, then I might have an IW.

+100

There's a difference between applying the rules with the spirit of the game and outright ignoring the rules. I'm going to call 3 seconds and I'm going to get a coach back in his box. Maybe not right on the nose, but it's going to happen. I'm not going to intentionally create a stoppage to get a sub in. That's the coach's job.

I do think it's an integrity issue. I don't have a big problem with it at the JH level. It has it's own needs. To do it in HS, well....

Keep it civil.

Based on your other thread I'm betting on this guy. :cool:

How can it be an integrity issue at one level but not the other?

I had a HS game last week where the final score was 87-17. Winning coach tells me while I am passing by he wants to get his guys out. When they got the ball, we got them in. Opposing coach didn't say a word.

Jr. high games or summer league games, I have no problem doing this...regular season, I have never done it and don't think I will. The question I ask is would we do it in a 2 point game to let the Coach get someone in there? No way...they would need to call a timeout, commit a foul, or a turnover...not that hard for the coach to tell a kid to foul someone or throw the ball oob...they can take care of getting a dead ball situation to get their subs in.

No. I agree, this isn't the time to do it. But my point is there could be a time to do it. Once again, when in Rome........

Maybe I'm a hard *** but there's no way in hell I'm just blowing my whistle in a blowout to bring subs in unless there's a specific mechanic provided by league rules. Don't care what the level of play is...even if this was an accepted practice in my area, I wouldn't do it. I'm also not going to call a phantom travel either...that doesn't look good on tape. If coach wants to get those players in, call a timeout...hell, tell a player to give a take foul for all I care.

Yeah, I get that...I still don't think it's that hard for the coach to tell his player to toss the ball oob.

Put me in APG's corner on this one. It's also something I've never seen done around here

Hey...why not my corner. I said that first. :mad::D

Because your name doesn't appear like this: rockyroad

That's funny. :D

That's a stupid reason.

Now shut up.:D

When I coached I've done this. My point guard looked at me funny when I told him to pass me the ball.

I have a problem with it at JH. It's just not a big problem at that level. In other words, in a HS game I'm writing a report to the assignor. In a JH game, I'm just telling you you shouldn't do it.

Our issue isn't your problem with it. The issue is your insinuation that it's a matter of integrity.

I haven't insinuated it. I've pretty plainly said that I think it's an integrity issue to intentionally set aside a rule because you don't feel like enforcing it for whatever reason.

I don't deny that you feel like you're on the side of angels. After all, you're just trying to let the benchwarmers get into the game. However, that doesn't make it acceptable. It's especially mind-boggling to me when there are far easier ways that are actually legal to get the players in ranging from a timeout to purposefully committing a turnover.

It's not a matter of integrity if the official readily admits that he is doing something outside the rules.

Angels? Hardly. I just don't think it's an integrity issue, and calling it such is just silly.

It makes the official honest. That's not the same thing as integrity. Integrity is (in part) doing what you've agreed to do. Not enforcing the rules when you've agreed to enforce the rules is an integrity issue.

"The rules" can refer to a lot of stuff:

• What's printed in the rule book
• National, state, or local interpretations
• The accepted traditions of the game
• Local expectations for how to call a game
• What's customary for the level

These don't always fit neatly together, and part of learning to officiate is learning to prioritize them in different circumstances. That's not easy, and it's not made any easier when someone comes along and starts challenging officials' integrity because they disagree with how the officials are sorting the "rules."

Thank you. I always need a reason to cry into my post-game beer. If my game tonight doesn't provide one, I'll remind myself of this thread.

As I said, I don't do this...but I don't think doing it is a sign of anyone's integrity when it is an accepted practice in their area.

Question for Eastshire: Team B is down by over 40 with less than a minute to play. Team A scores, And team B inbounds to their backup point guard who proceeds to travel before getting his dribble started 80 feet from the basket with no defender anywhere near him...are you going to call that travel?

Yes. I'm going to hate it and wish it hadn't happened but if I call every travel I'm sure of regardless of the score.

The reality, however, is I'm probably not watching the guard close enough to catch it in this situation. So it probably slides not because I'm avoiding the rule but because I'm focusing on different priorities and don't see it well enough to call it.

Seriously, unless you're calling 3 seconds by the book, calling multiple fouls on a regular basis, and maintaining a ten second free throw count that is no longer than your back court count, your discussion of "integrity" rings hollow.

Not to mention that end line throw in violation against the losing team's third string forward with 45 seconds left in a 50 point game.

Your position essentially has you impugning the integrity of every official on this board.

Honesty is part of integrity. Some officials do stuff outside the rules then make up a million and one excuses as to why it is justified. That is a lack of integrity.

Right there is an example of what I just cited, a bogus excuse as to why you aren't enforcing a rule. That is an integrity issue. Like someone is supposed to believe you are not watching the ball-handler when there is nothing else within 40' to look at.

An official with integrity will just admit that they passed on the call.

And an official who does make that travel call will eventually find a roadblock in their career progression.

I don't know about you, but I've been taught not to stare at the dribbler in this situation but to look up the court and find the first defender. So no, I'm not watching his feet and no I'm probably not going to see the travel well enough to call it. If you choose not to believe that, that's fine, but it is the truth.

If calling the game according to the rules means I don't "progress," that's just fine by me. I'm not in this gig for the glory of the games I get. I'm in it because I like sports and I enjoy the work.

What defender? There is no defender in sight. Again, an official who makes up excuses.

Glory of the games? Is that your euphenism for progressing and getting higher paying games?

Which is why I was trained to look for him.

Before the ball was thrown-in you would have known there was no defender in sight in the situation rockyroad proposed. Again, you are searching for a bunch of lame excuses as to why you wouldn't have called a travel but you feel like you can judge every other official as having no integrity for letting the subs in at an unauthorized time.

Now you're just making things up. I said I would, and I have even this season, call travelling in a lop sided game on the losing team with no defender in the backcourt. I don't see how saying I might not always catch it makes me looking for excuses.

I don't deliberately set aside rules, and neither should any referee.

When the defender is 40' away, there isn't much you need to be looking at other than the ball handler. It doesn't take any time to detect that they are not near the play. You have only 1 responsibility at that point...the ball and the ball handler. To say you're not going to see it because your focus is elsewhere is disingenuous at best. You're essentially closing your eyes to a potential violation....which is no better than not calling one that you do see because the game is so far out of reach that calling it would benefit no one.

There are the "rules" and there are the "right" calls. Sometimes, the correct call is not the right call. There is far more to the game than the book.

You may see me debate many points on this forum in a very technical rulebook stance but that doesn't mean I call them by the letter on the floor. Rules need to be understood inside and out, not just from a technical perspective, but from an intent and purpose perspective and, furthermore, from the perspective of how to intelligently apply them. The ability to apply them intelligently requires the full technical understanding but it doesn't mean you always call everything you see. Black and white application is easy, anyone can do it, but accepting that nearly every rule in the book has some wiggle room in the right circumstances will serve both you and the game much better.

Understanding of that has been something that I had to acquire. Once I did, I was able to officiate a much better game...not simply in blowouts but in close games too.

I agree. I disagree that stopping the game to allow substitutions fits inside the concept of intelligently applying the rules.

I would agree with that too...I'm not blowing the whistle for that just to get the subs in. That is carrying it too far IMO.

I believe you do call those travels against the lopsided loser. Do you call 3 seconds by the book? Do you call any multiple fouls, or do you pick one when there are multiple players who foul a shooter?

I agree. But it doesn't mean the officials who do it are showing a lack of integrity.

Kids want to play, even the least on the bench. Let them in, and move on.

I've been thinking about this thread for a while now, and I'm convinced that I was wrong.

I want to specifically apologize to Adam and OKREF and generally to anyone else I may have offended.

I think it's wrong to allow the subs, but I was wrong to say doing so was an integrity issue.