The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:27pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by mplagrow View Post
Basically, I told the coach that we stopped for injury so somebody was coming out. She left A1 in to shoot the free throw, and after the first free throw was made put A2 back in the game.
If the player is directed to leave the game, she is not allowed back in until after the clock has run, so this is really kind of pointless.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:45pm
(Something hilarious)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: These United States
Posts: 1,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
No, the other coach doesn't get to choose the free throw shooter unless they are playing by NCAA rules.
NCAA-M only.
__________________
I can't remember the last time I wasn't at least kind-of tired.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kaukauna, WI
Posts: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
If the player is directed to leave the game, she is not allowed back in until after the clock has run, so this is really kind of pointless.
Agreed. The girl came to the table and my partner waved her in. I didn't want to make an issue of it, especially with them already playing short on numbers.
__________________
Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never win AND never quit are idiots.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,212
My opinion

Quote:
Originally Posted by mplagrow View Post
Had a messy situation tonight. Team A is ahead by one but down to four eligible players with thirty seconds left. A1 is driving while B1 is trying to foul. A2 and A1 collide, simultaneous with a whistle on B1 for a foul. Both A1 and A2 are writhing on the floor in pain. Bench personnel come onto the floor to attend to both players.

Both players eventually get up, after being attended to. A1 is supposed to shoot bonus shots. How would you handle it? A is already playing short one player, but two girls were down hurt and no bench personnel available.
This is going to sound harsh, but at least one, if not both players shall leave the game.

What your question does not say is if the coach/trainer attended to just one of, or both of the team A players. If both were attended to, then both need to leave the game. The team captain/coach would then be allowed to choose who will take the free throws in replacement of A1, assuming she was attended to.

With all of that said, I would be making sure both players were actually attended to, and the coach/trainer didn't attend to one and just simple ask the other "Are you ok?"
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:57pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by mplagrow View Post
Agreed. The girl came to the table and my partner waved her in. I didn't want to make an issue of it, especially with them already playing short on numbers.
I believe there's a case play or interp that suggests playing with 5 (or as close to it as possible) trumps the rule about needing to "sit a tick." I would use the same philosophy for an injury in this situation.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 12:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kaukauna, WI
Posts: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by chapmaja View Post
This is going to sound harsh, but at least one, if not both players shall leave the game.

What your question does not say is if the coach/trainer attended to just one of, or both of the team A players. If both were attended to, then both need to leave the game. The team captain/coach would then be allowed to choose who will take the free throws in replacement of A1, assuming she was attended to.

With all of that said, I would be making sure both players were actually attended to, and the coach/trainer didn't attend to one and just simple ask the other "Are you ok?"
I don't know if I agree with that. What's the line between 'attending to' and checking if they're OK? That seems like a grey area to me. Whether a coach/trainer has been called out on the other hand is not. But it's a valid question, and one that somebody asked us after the game--why didn't both have to sit out a play? I don't see it as my role as a ref to determine the amount of attending that took place. The more I think about it, I should have strongly suggested the time out.
__________________
Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never win AND never quit are idiots.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 12:05am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by chapmaja View Post
This is going to sound harsh, but at least one, if not both players shall leave the game.

What your question does not say is if the coach/trainer attended to just one of, or both of the team A players. If both were attended to, then both need to leave the game. The team captain/coach would then be allowed to choose who will take the free throws in replacement of A1, assuming she was attended to.

With all of that said, I would be making sure both players were actually attended to, and the coach/trainer didn't attend to one and just simple ask the other "Are you ok?"
You'll need some rules basis to back this up. If you beckon a coach, it doesn't matter if they attended to the player or not.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 12:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
I believe there's a case play or interp that suggests playing with 5 (or as close to it as possible) trumps the rule about needing to "sit a tick." I would use the same philosophy for an injury in this situation.
To what extent?
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 12:56am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLydic View Post
To what extent?
If a team is down to 5 or fewer players, and one gets hurt to the point where I beckon a coach. Unless I'm told or find something different in the rules, I'm not forcing the player to "sit a tick."
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 02:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
If a team is down to 5 or fewer players, and one gets hurt to the point where I beckon a coach. Unless I'm told or find something different in the rules, I'm not forcing the player to "sit a tick."
Agree.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 07:47am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 21,931
Tick Tock ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by BLydic View Post
I don't think you can waive the substitution for injury based on the depth of the bench. By rule, the players were attended to and need to be substituted out of the game.
A player doesn't always have to sit a tick:

8.2 SITUATION B: A1 is fouled and will be shooting two free throws. After A1s
first free-throw attempt, B6 (Team Bs only remaining eligible substitute) replaces
B2. A1s second free-throw attempt is unsuccessful. During rebounding action for
A1s missed second free-throw attempt, and before the clock starts, A1 pushes B3
in the back causing B3 to roll an ankle. Team B is in the bonus. B3 is unable to
immediately continue playing. Team B requests and is granted a time out in order
to allow B3 to recover from the ankle injury so as to remain in the game. B3 is still
not able to play after the time out has ended. RULING: B2 may return to the game
and replace B3 and shoot B3s free throw attempts despite having been replaced
since he/she is the only available substitute. (3-3-4)
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

I was in prison and you came to visit me. (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 09:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
A player doesn't always have to sit a tick:

8.2 SITUATION B: A1 is fouled and will be shooting two free throws. After A1’s
first free-throw attempt, B6 (Team B’s only remaining eligible substitute) replaces
B2. A1’s second free-throw attempt is unsuccessful. During rebounding action for
A1’s missed second free-throw attempt, and before the clock starts, A1 pushes B3
in the back causing B3 to roll an ankle. Team B is in the bonus. B3 is unable to
immediately continue playing. Team B requests and is granted a time out in order
to allow B3 to recover from the ankle injury so as to remain in the game. B3 is still
not able to play after the time out has ended. RULING: B2 may return to the game
and replace B3 and shoot B3’s free throw attempts despite having been replaced
since he/she is the only available substitute. (3-3-4)
While there's a difference between a substitution due to injury and a substitute having to sit a tic, I appreciate you posting the caseplay.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 18, 2013, 10:08am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLydic View Post
While there's a difference between a substitution due to injury and a substitute having to sit a tic, I appreciate you posting the caseplay.
Like I said, the case play indicates that the need for 5 players (or as close to it as possible) trumps at least one other rule (the need to sit a tick). Unless the Fed, IAABO, my association's rules interpreter, or my assigner (in that order) explicitly say otherwise, I'm going with the philosophy that this concept applies to injuries as well.

It's such a rare occurrence, I'm not overly concerned though. If someone else handles it differently, I won't lose any sleep.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
You'll need some rules basis to back this up. If you beckon a coach, it doesn't matter if they attended to the player or not.
Someone will need to sit because the coach / trainer came on. There is no disputing that. The issue becomes were the called onto the court to attend to just one of the players or to both players. If I see one is potentially more seriously injured and the other is less seriously injured, I am bringing the coach out for the more seriously injured player first and ignoring the less injured player. This is no different than first aid for an accident victim. If you have two people injured in a car accident and one is squirting blood from a cut in their leg, and the other just has cuts from broken glass that are bleeding, but not squirting I am getting help for / helping the more seriously injured person first.

In basketball, I am always having the coach come on for the more seriously injured person first. If this allows the lesser injured player more time to recover, so be it. I'm not forcing both to sit unless both get medical assistance from the coach / trainer.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 19, 2013, 12:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by chapmaja View Post
Someone will need to sit because the coach / trainer came on. There is no disputing that.
Actually, there is.

There is precedent discarding some substitution rules (sit-a-tick, for one) when there are 5 or fewer available players/subs. I don't believe it is that far of a stretch to say that the same exception should apply to an injured player who is attended to. The rule that says there must be 5 players if there are 5 available trumps the various sit-out rules. If taking the injured player out would leave a team with fewer than 5 players, the get to stay in.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Advice on how to handle mouthy players ballgame99 Basketball 77 Sat Dec 10, 2011 01:54pm
How do you handle this situation. iowa_official Basketball 30 Sun Jan 27, 2008 07:58pm
How do you handle this situation? Rev.Ref63 Basketball 8 Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:31am
How to handle this situation alabamabluezebra Football 3 Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:04am
How would you handle this situation. JRutledge Basketball 33 Mon Jul 29, 2002 10:37pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:20am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1