Player Game Entry

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by ezmcgowan

Here's the scenario I need help with: After a timeout, game play starts with one team only having 4 players on the court. Upon realizing they're short, a player runs out from the bench and joins the game. Is this an illegal substitution since there is not really a player swap? If not what is the call? Doesn't this present an opportunity for the 4 man team to sneak a player in to an open spot on the court?

If the player was a pre-time out player:
NFHS: It's a team T for the rule cited already for failure to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time out.
NCAA: Without some sort of intentional deception to gain an advantage in the officials' judgment, there isn't much rule support to call anything.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

The 2014-15 season will be my 44th year of officiating basketball and I can honestly say that I cannot remember ever restarting a game with one or both teams only having four players on the court.

There are at least two and as many as three officials on the court. The ball should not be put into play until each official has counted all of the players on the court at least twice. The non-administering official(s) should keep one hand in the "stop sign signal" directed to the administering official until he or she is satisfied that there are five players for each team on the court. If you have any doubts as to whether each team as the correct number of players on the court do NOT let the administering official put the ball back into play.

I know that I am sounding curmudgeonerly, BUT, this type of thing should not ever happen.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The 2014-15 season will be my 44th year of officiating basketball and I can honestly say that I cannot remember ever restarting a game with one or both teams only having four players on the court.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.: How about one team having six players on the court? Be honest.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

If the player was a pre-time out player:
NFHS: It's a team T for the rule cited already for failure to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time out.
NCAA: Without some sort of intentional deception to gain an advantage in the officials' judgment, there isn't much rule support to call anything.

But again, the ruling specifies, before making the ruling, that several things happened before the 5th player eventually returned. If they wanted it to be an immediate T, it would have stopped the setup when the ball was made live...not after several more actions. The purpose of the rule is to prevent a team from having a player sneak back in late for a potential advantage, intended or not. Thus, the occurrence being penalized is when the missing player enters the court, not when 4 enter without the 5th.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The 2014-15 season will be my 44th year of officiating basketball and I can honestly say that I cannot remember ever restarting a game with one or both teams only having four players on the court.

There are at least two and as many as three officials on the court. The ball should not be put into play until each official has counted all of the players on the court at least twice. The non-administering official(s) should keep one hand in the "stop sign signal" directed to the administering official until he or she is satisfied that there are five players for each team on the court. If you have any doubts as to whether each team as the correct number of players on the court do NOT let the administering official put the ball back into play.

I know that I am sounding curmudgeonerly, BUT, this type of thing should not ever happen.

MTD, Sr.

Sounds great, Mark. However, I'm guessing you just forgot. Lots of thing shouldn't happen, but they do. This is one, and discussions about how to deal with it aren't really helped by saying, "This should never happen."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Aren't team members considered players if they're sitting on the bench during a sixty second timeout (not an intermission)? Let's not treat this too casually, it's important, so let's try to figure it out.

So do we let just another ref's post stand, or does it have to be adjusted? I'm not sure that rookie officials should be hanging their hats on just another ref's statement. Then again, I may be wrong. I have been wrong in the past. Lots of times.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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

No. The Players are still Players and the Team Members are Team Members during a time out.

See 4.34.1

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No. The Players are still Players and the Team Members are Team Members during a time out.

SECTION 34 PLAYERS/BENCH PERSONNEL/SUBSTITUTES/TEAM MEMBERS
ART. 1 A player is one of five team members who are legally on the court
at any given time, except intermission.
ART. 2 Bench personnel are all individuals who are part of or affiliated with
a team, including, but not limited to: substitutes, coaches, manager(s) and
statistician(s). During an intermission, all team members are bench personnel for
the purpose of penalizing unsporting behavior.
ART. 3 A substitute becomes a player when he/she legally enters the court.
If entry is not legal, the substitute becomes a player when the ball becomes live.
A player becomes bench personnel after his/her substitute becomes a player or
after notification of the coach following his/her disqualification.
ART. 4 A team member is a member of bench personnel who is in uniform
and is eligible to become a player.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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

Maybe I should have said: Aren't those on the team considered players if they're sitting on the bench during a sixty second timeout if they were players before the timeout and not substituted for?

Bottom line, they don't have to be within the boundary lines (inbounds) of the court (blue line all the way around) to be considered players, as implied by just another ref's post:

Originally Posted by just another ref

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.

[just another ref]

In the OP, the timeout is over. If B5 is on the bench, he is not a player.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

In the OP, the timeout is over. If B5 is on the bench, he is not a player.

Assuming B5 was not an entering substitute, and was a player before the time out, and during the timeout (it's not an intermission), why is he no longer a player after the timeout out, even while sitting on the bench. I'm truly not trying to give anybody a hard time, I just want to understand the rule, including the definition of a player versus bench personnel. Pretend that I'm from Missouri. Citation please.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by PG_Ref

NFHS: 10-1
ART. 9

A team shall not:

Fail to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission.

Caseplay
10.1.9 SITUATION:

Following a charged time-out Team B is still with their coach on the sideline when the official sounds the whistle to indicate play will resume. Four players of B return to the court just in time to play defense as A1 attempts an unsuccessful three-pointer. B1 rebounds and throws a long pass to B5 who enters the court just in time to catch the pass.

RULING: A technical foul is immed*iately charged to Team B for failing to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission. While it is true the entire team may be off the court while the procedure is being used, once a team responds, all players must enter the court at approximately the same time.

If "on the sideline" is not on the court, I am comfortable that a team member sitting on the bench is not on the court. Therefore, by definition, this team member is not a player. BUT, none of this matters anyway. The illegal part occurs when the 5th player in the OP enters the court, whether he was a player before that or not. A team is not allowed to have only 4 players on the court when the 5th is available, but there is no penalty if indeed this does occur.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Assuming B5 was not an entering substitute, and was a player before the time out, and during the timeout (it's not an intermission), why is he no longer a player after the timeout out, even while sitting on the bench. I'm truly not trying to give anybody a hard time, I just want to understand the rule, including the definition of a player versus bench personnel. Pretend that I'm from Missouri. Citation please.

I can see where this can/would cause confusion. According to 3-3-3 there are only two ways a player ceases being a player:

*after (their) substitute becomes a player
*after notification of the coach following (their) disqualification

No one substituted for B5 so their "player" status never ended.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If "on the sideline" is not on the court, I am comfortable that a team member sitting on the bench is not on the court. Therefore, by definition, this team member is not a player.

So if a uniformed person on the team, who was player before the timeout, who continues to be player during the timeout (is not substituted for, and it's not an intermission), and who mistakenly believes that he has been substituted for and remains on the bench after the timeout (after his four teammates enter the court to participate in the game), and, who, while the bench, stupidly (he's a real knucklehead) curses a nearby official, thus being charged with a technical foul; just another ref will also charge the head coach with an indirect technical foul because said person is bench personnel?

If that's the coach's third technical foul, and he's ejected, I want to be sure that I'm applying the rule correctly when I call my assigner later that night, and when he hears from the athletic director the next morning. Right now I'm "leaning" toward this person being a player, but I'm not 100% sure, which is why I would like to hear others' opinions in this thread.

I'm not sure that this is relevant but I thought that it would be worth throwing on the pile:
3-3-1-A- Note: When the substitute(s) is not properly reported, the player(s) in the game at
the conclusion of the quarter/when the time-out was called shall begin play for the
new quarter/after the time-out.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If "on the sideline" is not on the court, I am comfortable that a team member sitting on the bench is not on the court. Therefore, by definition, this team member is not a player.

Even during a sixty second timeout (not an intermission), where there are no substitutions?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I can see where this can/would cause confusion. According to 3-3-3 there are only two ways a player ceases being a player:
*after (their) substitute becomes a player
*after notification of the coach following (their) disqualification

One more (not in 3-3-3): During an intermission.

4-34-1: A player is one of five team members who are legally on the court
at any given time, except intermission.