No, that's a timeout...you only complicate things for younger officials when you introduce such thinking.

I think that should be the rule -- if you resume play with 4 (whether after a TO or a substitution), then play with 4 until the next opportunity to substitute. Or, treat it like an injury in that play is stopped after the "injured player's team" gets the ball.

Huh?
 

I deem that incorrect by virtue of the PENALTY stated at the end of 10-1: "(Art.3,4,5,8,9,10) Penalized when they occur."
Occurance would be whether B5 entered or not, given the wording of the rule.
Right?

A player is one of five team members who are legally on the court at any given time......


If B5 does not enter the court, he isn't a player. So the 4 on the court in this case are all the players.

I'm with Camron here.

The "when they occur" is when the 5th "player" returns at a later time, not when the 4 players enter without the 4th. If only 4 return, all that did so did return at the same time.

What's the intent of the rule?

The intent is not to prevent them from playing with 4, there's already a rule for that. The intent is to prevent deceit, IMO.

Trying to Get My Head Around This
 

Is there some other rule that prevents them from playing with 4 specifically after a timeout or intermission other than 10-1-9?

No, just the rule that says they have to play with 5 if they're available.

There's a Lot of Money Riding on This
 

I see that point based on 3-1, in regards to which 3.1.1 dictates: "Team B must have five players participating as long as it has that number available."

Therefore, is it not a logical, sound application of this same rule that, for instance, if a team is caught playing with only four players after a timeout or intermission, that they be then assessed a team technical if/when it is detected that they failed "...to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission"? Especially when that's what 10-1-9 actually says?

Check local listings.

"My team is on the floor." ;)

Reading Is Fundamental ...
 

Thus my statement (twice, now three times) about my post about a lengthy substitution being academic (not practical, realistic, or directly useful).

I will agree that I complicated matters for younger officials before I read PG_Ref's great post, and citation, but so did BadNewsRef by continuing the discussion when it was, after all, academic.

Players, Bench Personnel, Team Members ???
 

Sounds good, but what defines the court?

Aren't team members considered players if they're sitting on the bench during a sixty second timeout (not an intermission)?

I know that all team members are considered bench personnel during intermissions. This rule becomes important when deciding to charge, or not to charge, a coach with an indirect technical foul for technical fouls on players, or on bench personnel, during a timeout, or an intermission. Let's not treat this too casually, it's important, so let's try to figure it out.

A player who was a player before the timeout remains a player during a timeout, I believe...