Player Game Entry

[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.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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 this team member is on the bench at this point, he is definitely bench personnel. I doubt if even you would go back and say "Wait a minute. This guy was in the game before the timeout. You're off the hook, coach."

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.

Does anybody attempt to keep up with this? I don't. I have advised coaches, off the record, whatever you do, don't send a player to report at the end of the timeout, because they may not be allowed in. If you really need a sub at this point, just send him in. Chances are, nobody will notice.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does anybody attempt to keep up with this? I don't. I have advised coaches, off the record, whatever you do, don't send a player to report at the end of the timeout, because they may not be allowed in. If you really need a sub at this point, just send him in. Chances are, nobody will notice.

Yes, anyone who reports after the warning horn gets to wait. And at the high school level, around here, the table almost always lets me know. If he "really needs" a sub, he should have sent him sooner.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

...


Does anybody attempt to keep up with this? I don't. I have advised coaches, off the record, whatever you do, don't send a player to report at the end of the timeout, because they may not be allowed in. If you really need a sub at this point, just send him in. Chances are, nobody will notice.

I've never spoke to coaches about it, but I think it in my head a lot. I'm sure the more cunning coaches do this.

[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?

[OKREF]

Let's take this one more step. 10-1 says it's penalized when the fifth player returns. What if they play with four and there is a dead ball. B5 legally subs in. Technical foul? I would think no.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by OKREF

10-1 says it's penalized when the fifth player returns. What if they play with four and there is a dead ball. B5 legally subs in. Technical foul? I would think no.

I may agree with you, but it's not exactly what the rule states (10-1-9: Fail to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission), it's what the casebook play (10.1.9) states. The rule can be read a few different ways. I'm one who believes that the casebook play, especially one that deals with a very specific situation, as written, "trumps" the rule, as written, but I'm sure that others believe differently.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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

Nothing in this thread has anything to do with what happens during a timeout.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Nothing in this thread has anything to do with what happens during a timeout.

Not including my own posts:

Originally Posted by ezmcgowan

Here's the scenario I need help with: After a timeout ...?

Originally Posted by Freddy

Except the play in question occurs after a time out, not a lengthy substitution.

Originally Posted by PG_Ref

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 ...

Originally Posted by Adam

There is no reason a timeout should last more than 60 seconds, and substitutions are the least acceptable reason.

Originally Posted by Freddy

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

There are more.

This whole thread is about a person in uniform sitting on the bench after a timeout instead of returning to the floor where he belongs.

There are also posts regarding whether, or not, said person on the bench is a player, or is bench personnel.

It is my contention that said person is a player in both this situation, and in another situation in which an indirect technical foul is not being charged to the head coach because said person is not bench personnel.

The definition of a player in one situation should be the same as the definition in another situation.

Some posters in this thread ...

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..

... contend that just because the person is not within the boundaries of the playing court (blue line all the way around) that it's impossible for said person to be considered a player. Although I have some other questions about some other aspects of this thread, aspects where, although I have an opinion, I'm unsure of the correct interpretation, I reject that contention (person is not within the boundaries of the playing court, it's impossible for said person to be considered a player) wholeheartedly.

If said person is a player during a timeout, then that person should be considered a player after a timeout, unless a substitution, or a disqualification, occurs, even when they're sitting on the bench. Also, 3-3-1-A-Note tells us that said person is also player after an intermission (although not during the intermission).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The illegal part occurs when the 5th player in the OP enters the court...

10-1-9: Fail to have all players return to the court at approximately the same
time following a time-out or intermission.

Maybe this rule isn't written clearly (big surprise for the NFHS), although it appears to be simple, direct, not very complex, and quite clear?

Is the technical foul charged for not having all five players entering at the same time?

Or is the technical foul charged for the fifth player entering at a time other than when the four entered?

I'm a big caseplay fan, and this caseplay (below) seems to indicate that the second interpretation (above, fifth player entering at a time other than when the four entered) drives the technical foul being charged:

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 immediately 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.

[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.

[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."

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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

Originally Posted by Adam

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."

Adam:

I will address your post first. I am getting senile in my old age but allowing a game to restart with a team having only four players on the court is something I would remember. I did not say that it should never happen. You said "should never happen." I said: "this type of thing should not ever happen." Remember, the late J. Dallas Shirley said: "Never say never and never say always."


Billy:

Yes, I have had instances of six players on the court of one team, but not I do not remember allowing a game to restart with six players on the court. That said, like every one on this board I have had a sixth player run on the court.

But I remember one situation in a girls' H.S. jr. varsity game years ago. The Home team dressed only six players. We were in the middle of the third quarter and the Visitors had the ball Table Side in their front court and I was Trail when the Visitors requested and was granted a timeout. I administered the Visitors' throw-in after the timeout in front of their bench. V-1 inbounded the ball to V-2 opposite side of the front court. As V-2 drove to the basket, H-1 ran passed me toward her bench and out of my vision. As V-2 scored, H-6 ran into the Visitors' front court. At first glance I thought it was H-1 running back until I realized that it was H-6 and not H-1. Of course we had probably had six players in the court at the same time during this play. None-the-less we had three possible TF scenarios but we choose to charge the Home Team with a TF for having six players on the court. The hilarious part was the V-HC thought we shouldn't allow her team's basket because the other team had six players on the court .

MTD, Sr.