Intentional foul and sub?
 

NFHS rules. A1 is on a fast break, goes up for a layup. B1 intentionally fouls A1. A1 goes down hard, stays down for a minute. Trainer and coach come out to look at him. A1 walks off under his own power to the bench. Coach A asks if A1's substitute can shoot the free throws, and later have A1 enter the game. What are the rules governing this situation? I have searched the books, but have not found anything.

NFHS Rules ...
 

Once the trainer, and coach, come out onto the court, then A1 must be replaced (assuming an eligible substitute is available), or Team A must request, and be granted a timeout. If replaced, A's substitute will shoot the free throws, and A1 may reenter the game after the clock has been started properly.

3-3-4: A player who has been replaced, or directed to leave the game shall
not re-enter before the next opportunity to substitute after the clock has been
started properly following his/her replacement.

3-3-6: A player who has been injured to the extent that the coach or any
other bench personnel is beckoned and/or comes onto the court shall be directed
to leave the game, unless a time-out is requested by, and granted to, his/her team
and the situation can be corrected by the end of the time-out.

8-2: The free throw(s) awarded because of a personal foul shall be attempted by the
offended player. If such player must withdraw because of an injury or
disqualification, his/her substitute shall attempt the throw(s) unless no substitute
is available, in which case any teammate may attempt the throw(s) as selected by
the team captain or head coach.

Confucius says, "Must sit a tick, don’t have to play a tick".

Only the sub for that player can shoot the FTs. The rules were quoted by Billy properly. What you might want to be aware of the NCAA rules are different and without getting too detailed the opposing coach can in some cases select the shooter if a player behaves as hurt. So do not get talked into do that in a NF Rules game.

Peace

For those who need to know: That would be NCAAM rules that are different. NCAAW rules are the same as NFHS in this case.

And someone trying to suggest you apply the NCAA rule would not care or know the difference.

Peace

It Could Happen ...
 

To look at some crazy, hypothetical, once-in-million-years, permutations of this situation (as some of us often like to do): If A1 is unable, due to the injury, to attempt the free throws, and if there are no eligible substitutes available on Team A (injury, illness, disqualification), then the coach of Team A must select a free throw shooter from the other four Team A players on the court. If, however, the only available substitute on the Team A bench is A6, who is legally ineligible because has not yet "sat his tick" after a previous substitution (it's possible under a rare circumstance, but maybe not in the original post), then A6 must replace A1 and must attempt his free throws. The rule that a team must play with five players "trumps" the "sit a tick" rule.

Of course, its easier for all involved if A1 just "sucks it up" and shoots his own free throws.

Note: Favorite quote from a recent article in Sports Illustrated on baseball's designated hitter rule: "The designated hitter rule is like letting someone else take Wilt Chamberlain's free throws." (Rick Wise, pitcher, 15 career home runs)


http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.48541...42428&pid=15.1 http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.49125...14453&pid=15.1

Based on what? Is that actually a rule or an assumption? I agree with you...seems like a logical way to do it, but I was wondering if that was an opinion of the Fed.

Yes, it is.

It's been discussed here before -- you could try a search (recognizign that that doesn't always work well)

"Dream A Little Dream Of Me" ...
 

Great question Bad Zebra. One thing that I know, for sure, is that it's an opinion shared by most veteran Forum members, but, of course, that really doesn't hold any NFHS weight.

Somewhere on the Forum, is the very rare situation of A6 being replaced by substitute A2 before the first free throw by A1 in a one and one situation. After hitting the rim, while jostling for position on a possible rebound (the ball eventually goes in the basket), A3 is injured, and the coach, and trainer, after being beckoned, and coming onto the court, decide that A3 must come out of the game. As a result of injuries, illness, and disqualifications, the only available substitute on the Team A bench is A6, who, because the clock never started (remember that the ball went in), has not yet sat out his "tick". The opinion expressed by most veteran Forum members was that A6, while not having sat out a requisite "tick", must be allowed to replace A3 because the rule that a team must play with five players "trumps" the "sit a tick" rule.

Maybe it's in Nevadaref's archives? Maybe it came to me in a dream? Maybe some veteran "esteemed" Forum members can help me out here?

I Wasn't Dreaming ...
 

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)

Does this get me closer to becoming an esteemed Forum member?

Just trying to be accurate for the forum clientele. That's kind of what we do around here.

So a team can sub a better FT shooter for the "injured" player, shoot the FT's, and have the "injured" player reenter the game at the next dead ball or with a timeout? Seems like a big advantage to allow a better FT shooter to shoot.

Well, first, the OP stated it was an intentional foul. I believe all rule sets are the same in that case (with the possible exception of FIBA). Second, how many times do you actually see this? I might have a sub shoot FTs once every season or two. Is it possible to cheat the system? Yeah, but that potential is trumped by the safety benefits of doing it the way it's done now. Players are less likely to try to play through an injury.

Safety First ...
 

Don't forget the "sit a tick" rule. If the poor free throw shooting "injured" player is their best ball handler, or top scorer, or top defender, or their tallest front line player, and top rebounder, that player may have to sit on the bench for quite some time, possibly several minutes. It's seems like a small price to pay to get a good free throw shooter on the line, but it could come back to bite the coach in the butt. Add that to the fact that even the best free throw shooter can miss a few in a row, and even the worst free throw shooter can make a few in a row, so "taking advantage of the rules" becomes a real gamble, probably a good gamble but, nevertheless, a gamble.

It was not the point. The point is someone is going to try to suggest a rule that most here will never be using. It happens all the time. I really do not care if it is women's or men's basketball, people still use the term NCAA as an all encompassing term. And if you want to be honest, the general public pays very little attention to Women's basketball (ratings, SC highlights), so does it really matter at this point?

Peace

Not often, but it happened to me.

When the rule says the injured player "must withdraw" does this mean for the entire game, or just for that period until he/she can reenter the game?

Well not really because NCAA and NBA does not have an intentional foul rule anymore. Now NCAA has a Flagrant 1 rule which is similar to an intentional foul. But that is why this can be confusing, because people try to suggest you are not apply the rule properly if you are not applying rules they see on TV more often.

And college coaches and I am sure NBA coaches certainly must have tried to cheat the system and I can assume that is why their rules are different then the NF on this issue.

Peace

What? A player too injured to shoot? Or a player who cheats the rule? I've never had a player cheat the rule, and I can probably use my fingers to count the number of times I've actually had a player too injured to shoot his/her free throws.

What does the rule say about how long a player must sit out if he's forced to be subbed out due to injury?

It was a terminology change at the NCAA level. Flagrant 1 is for all practical purposes identical the NFHS intentional; and my point still stands. In the OP, the application is identical for college and high school.

The He-Man Woman Haters Club ...
 

True, but women's basketball still ranks higher then IRL (Indy Racing League) in most polls, so there must be a few million fans paying attention to women's basketball out there. We shouldn't discount those players, fans, coaches, parents, and officials, on the Forum. Whether it's high school girls basketball, or NCAA Women, or the WNBA, or Olympic women's basketball, or overseas women's basketball, it may not be to the liking of some, or many, Forum members, but it's still basketball, it needs good officiating, and it's worth our attention. Plus, the members of the Forum do not represent the "general public", most members care very deeply about basketball, in some cases, maybe a just few cases, female basketball, certainly more so than the general public.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.47803...69036&pid=15.1

I've Got It Covered ...
 

NFHS 3-3-4: A player who has been replaced, or directed to leave the game shall
not re-enter before the next opportunity to substitute after the clock has been
started properly following his/her replacement.

Or, in other words, a player, with very rare exceptions, must "sit a tick" (but he doesn't have to "play a tick").

Ok, everything makes sense now. I had the idea that an injured player is one who cannot return to the game due to his injury. However, outside of concussions, it does not seem to me as though the Federation wants officials to be the judges of who can and cannot play due to injury. We simply have to follow the correct substitution rules for whoever the coach removes from the game or sends to the table. No more Injury Police™.

Without The Express Written Consent ...
 

Great. Now I've got to do an internet image search for a new badge.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5495/9...ccdd6e8b_m.jpg

You Can Lead A Horse To Water, And Sometmes You Can Make Him Drink ...
 

This has nothing to do with discounting who supports a sport. This is about what is likely going to happen and what is likely you will have people claim is a rule at the NF or HS level? Still the percentage of people that quote a specific NCAA Women's rule is so rare I cannot think of the last time I have even heard a specific NCAA Women's suggested by a player or coach in the an actual game. And I was only trying to illustrate that there is a rules difference and someone might think the NF is the same as another level. It happens all the time where an NBA rule is assumed to apply. Who cares at this point of the NCAAM or NCAAW rule is different? And since I am the one that made the point to not apply the NCAA rule, it seems silly to point out where the the differences are at the NCAA level. I did not quote the NCAA rule on purpose.

Peace

Will Somebody Please Help Me Off This Soapbox, I Feel Like I'm Going To Fall Off ...
 

All true, but your statement, "The general public pays very little attention to women's basketball", has very little meaning on an internet forum that specifically deals with officiating basketball, which includes, to the dismay of some, but, I'm sure, not all, Forum members, basketball played by females. The general public has very little to do with what transpires here on the Forum. The general public does occasionally post on this Forum, but almost all of the posts are by basketball officials, some who officiate basketball games with female participants, including me. I don't officiate college basketball, but I do have a slight interest in the difference between NCAAM, and NCAAW, rules, interpretations, and mechanics. Thus, I appreciated JetMetFan's post, maybe I was the only Forum member who did, but I'd bet a dime (indicating my lack of confidence in my wager) that I probably wasn't the only Forum member who did. I'm pretty sure that JetMetFan appreciated his own post, so maybe I'm up a dime.

OK, so what is your point? This is not about interest.

Most officials here do not work NCAA games on any level either as well. That is why I did not post the specific NCAA rule on the issue. Just wanted it to be known that rule like other NCAA rules often get sublimated to NF situations and rules. And once again, this specific situation in my experience I have heard officials allow a coach or have to stop a coach from claiming they can choose the shooter when a player is injured after a foul. Just wait, you will see people trying to use the NCAA rule for block/charge consideration after they have read the change and assume that change applies to high school players.

Another example is how many times I see POI used in technical foul in all situations by officials that do not even work NCAA games in the first place while the Men's and Women's rules are somewhat different in some situations. This has nothing to do about interest, just warning not to apply a rule from a level they are not likely working under. Not sure why that is hard to understand?

Peace

Inquiring Minds Want To Know ...
 

JetMetFan made his post to show the difference in NCAAM, NCAAW, and NFHS rules regarding this situation. I still can't see any harm in that, especially on a basketball rules forum, a forum that often deals with more than one set of rules, and has some members that may have to deal with more than one set of rules while officiating. Even some high school games, that use officials that are most familiar with NFHS rules, will often use another rule set, or a modified rule set, i.e., NCAAM, and NCAAW, rules for prep school games here in Connecticut, and, I believe, some NCAA rules for high school games in New York, and Massachusetts. JetMetFan should be commended for his post. Not sure why that is hard to understand?

And, although true, I contend that the statement, "The general public pays very little attention to women's basketball", really has no place in a basketball officiating forum, unless, of course, the thread is about the popularity of a particular "brand" of basketball. What do Forum members care what the general public likes, or doesn't like, about basketball played by females. Just because something is true doesn't make it "postable", especially when JetMetFan's post is being questioned as appropriate, or necessary, to the thread. I'm not so sure that, "The general public pays very little attention to women's basketball", is appropriate, or necessary, to this thread, maybe others, but not this one. Not sure why that is hard to understand?

Well great commend whomever you like. I just found it an irrelevant point to make (my right to have an opinion). We were not debating the different NCAA gender differences. And since I was making the point originally, it had nothing to do with what I was saying and no one has yet to quote the rule (which I choose to do on purpose). And since he quoted my post, I have a right to comment on that post and what I think of it. No big deal.

I will say this, his post was more relevant to the topic then most of your post Billy. ;)

Peace

Closure, Peace ???...
 

Agree. 100%. Don't you guys wish that all of my posts were more like JetMetFan's, or JRutledge's, and less like Mark Padgett's?

(That's a rhetorical question with no answer expected, in fact, please don't answer the question.)

My take...both posts have their merits. There's nothing wrong with JMF pointing out that there is a difference between the NCAA-M rule and the NCAA-W. Someone will read that and learn something new...

I also think JRut has a point in that the overwhelming majority of conflicts that comes from rule differences between high school and college comes from the fact that the general public is quoting or trying to remember a men's college rule. Simple matter is many more people follow and watch men's college basketball than the women's game and will reference that rule...just like more people watch the NBA versus WNBA (though with their recent rule changes, they are pretty much, if not completely, aligned with NBA rules).

Dodged The Bullet ...
 

Whew. Thanks for not answering my rhetorical question.

Don't flatter yourself.

In Other Words ...
 

With apologies to Senator Lloyd Bentsen:

"BillyMac, I served with Mark Padgett. I knew Mark Padgett. Mark Padgett was a friend of mine. BillyMac, you're no Mark Padgett." (just another ref)

Agree.

+1,000,000

[QUOTE=BillyMac;898969]With apologies to Senator Lloyd Bentsen:

"BillyMac, I served with Mark Padgett. I knew Mark Padgett. Mark Padgett was a friend of mine. BillyMac, you're no Mark Padgett." (just another ref)

Agree.[/

Between the belt and your middle school schedule, I doubt anyone really wants
On this site really wants to be you...;);););)

I Already Know, I'm A Bad Boy, A Very Bad Boy ...
 

Hey? Watch it. Most of my Catholic middle school games are middle school "varsity" games. Yeah. That's right. "Varsity" games. You heard it right. I only work a few middle school "junior varsity" games each season. And I never work the middle school "junior varsity B" games. I'm too good for those third, and fourth, graders. They just don't get it when I explain the correctable error rule to them. Working those games would just be a waste of my time.

In what world is 3rd grade "middle school?"

Never mind, I'm already sorry I asked.

Adam - you know better !!!!
 

Questioning will result in him giving 5 posts as to him explaining ms games to us in his tiny corner of nw Connecticut, in IAABO country where wearing a shiny nelt is acceptable.....

There I have said what he will say......

Adam one more post like that and it is back to Snackwells for you or Snagwells....

Better yet, we should your moderator privileges for a week...:D:D:D

Just The Facts, Ma'am ...
 

Wrong, and wrong again. It's a little corner of Connecticut, not a tiny corner. It's a black belt, not a shiny black belt. Wearing a shiny black belt would be unprofessional.

Good Question ...
 

Most of the Catholic schools around here, those that are lower, grade wise, than high schools, are really combined elementary, and middle, schools under one roof, unlike the public schools that have separate buildings for these lower, and intermediate, grade levels.

Well, since Billy still acts like a 6th grader, his statement makes perfect sense.

I'm, I'm Bad As King Kong, Gimme The Ball ...
 

And with my size, and skills, I would make the "varsity" team. Six feet tall, two hundred pounds, fifty years of basketball experience. I would cream those little eighth grade gym rats. They can't stop me. I've got a basketball jones.

This thread has run its course.