Mistaken substitution

[La Rikardo]

A6 and A7 report to the scorer that they are entering the game. A6 enters for A1. A7 enters and tells A2 he's entering the game for him. A's head coach then yells to A7 that he made a mistake and he doesn't want him to go in the game after all.

Was A2 officially replaced? Should A2 be directed to go to the bench and have to wait until the clock starts to go back in?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

A6 and A7 report to the scorer that they are entering the game. A6 enters for A1. A7 enters and tells A2 he's entering the game for him. A's head coach then yells to A7 that he made a mistake and he doesn't want him to go in the game after all.

Was A2 officially replaced? Should A2 be directed to go to the bench and have to wait until the clock starts to go back in?

Well, the subs become players - in part - when they legally enter the court (3-3-3). Assuming A7 entered legally, i.e. was beckoned, A2 is out.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Well, the subs become players - in part - when they legally enter the court (3-3-3). Assuming A7 entered legally, i.e. was beckoned, A2 is out.

Agreed, although the team could still have someone other than A2 come out.

[Adam]

The question isn't really whether A7 can sit. The question is whether A2 has to sit.

[PG_Ref]

Hmmm ... never really gave this scenario much thought. If A7 has been beckoned in and enters for A2, and now A2 is bench personnel, and then coach says he wants A7 out, then A8 needs to come in as sub (if indeed the coach wants A7 out). What a tangled web we weave ... or something like that.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

In the Ancient Days, A6 and A7 would have to declare to the Scorer which player each would be replacing, unlike today which requires A6 and A7 to just report to the Scorer and then replace any of the five players on the court.

MTD, Sr.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

In the Ancient Days, A6 and A7 would have to declare to the Scorer which player each would be replacing, unlike today which requires A6 and A7 to just report to the Scorer and then replace any of the five players on the court.

MTD, Sr.

That's correct alright. So, as Bob said, A2 doesn't necessarily have to come out but somebody does. And, as PG Ref said, A7 could be substituted for if the coach decided he didn't want him in there.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by billyu2

That's correct alright. So, as Bob said, A2 doesn't necessarily have to come out but somebody does. And, as PG Ref said, A7 could be substituted for if the coach decided he didn't want him in there.

If I don't know who A7 reported for and the coach pulls him back before I find out, I'm not forcing a sub here. Once A7 tells A2, though, now A2 has been replaced. Coach doesn't have to play A7, but at that point A2 needs to wait for the clock to properly run.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Adam

If I don't know who A7 reported for and the coach pulls him back before I find out, I'm not forcing a sub here. Once A7 tells A2, though, now A2 has been replaced. Coach doesn't have to play A7, but at that point A2 needs to wait for the clock to properly run.

I've had cases where A6 comes in and yells "Billy, you're out" and the coach says "no, not Billy. I sent you in for Jimmy."

Jimmy leaves, Billy stays, no problem.

Now, if Billy gets off the court ...

If we keep this up we'll have the whole volleyball / soccer scenario of doing the exchange just to avoid problems.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I've had cases where A6 comes in and yells "Billy, you're out" and the coach says "no, not Billy. I sent you in for Jimmy."

Jimmy leaves, Billy stays, no problem.

Now, if Billy gets off the court ...

If we keep this up we'll have the whole volleyball / soccer scenario of doing the exchange just to avoid problems.

Good point. If Coach says, "Never mind, Robby, get back here," what do you do?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

In the Ancient Days, A6 and A7 would have to declare to the Scorer which player each would be replacing, unlike today which requires A6 and A7 to just report to the Scorer and then replace any of the five players on the court.

The change actually wasn't that long ago (in Mark Padgett years).

2000-2001: 3-3-1: A substitute who desires to enter shall report to the scorer, giving his/her number and the number of the player who is being replaced.

2001-2002: 3-3-1: A substitute who desires to enter shall report to the scorer, giving his/her number.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Adam

If I don't know who A7 reported for and the coach pulls him back before I find out, I'm not forcing a sub here. Once A7 tells A2, though, now A2 has been replaced. Coach doesn't have to play A7, but at that point A2 needs to wait for the clock to properly run.

FWIW, here is why that is not a good idea: Had a coach who, while his team was shooting a free throw would have A7 report and following the made free throw A7 was brought in. The coach would immediately change his mind and ask for A7 to return to the bench. In the meantime, of course, Team A had plenty of time to set up their press. The coach really didn't want anyone to come out. Fortunately, the officials recognized that crap very quickly and told the coach A7 is in. Someone HAS to come out.

[La Rikardo]

Originally Posted by billyu2

FWIW, here is why that is not a good idea: Had a coach who, while his team was shooting a free throw would have A7 report and following the made free throw A7 was brought in. The coach would immediately change his mind and ask for A7 to return to the bench. In the meantime, of course, Team A had plenty of time to set up their press. The coach really didn't want anyone to come out. Fortunately, the officials recognized that crap very quickly and told the coach A7 is in. Someone HAS to come out.

I agree with most of the comments that by rule in my original situation, an A player must leave the game (I don't think it has to be A2) and I think your situation is a good example of why the rule is the way it is. But also in my original situation, A was bringing in A6 anyway, so the officials are going to keep the ball from becoming live regardless of whether or not a player must leave the game. Is there a common sense explanation as to why, in my original situation, I'm telling A's coach that one of his player has to leave the game? I'm fully supportive of enforcing the rule to the letter here, I'd just want something to say to a coach beyond "that's the rule, sorry."

[billyu2]

[QUOTE=La Rikardo;948140]I agree with most of the comments that by rule in my original situation, an A player must leave the game (I don't think it has to be A2) and I think your situation is a good example of why the rule is the way it is. But also in my original situation, A was bringing in A6 anyway, so the officials are going to keep the ball from becoming live regardless of whether or not a player must leave the game. Is there a common sense explanation as to why, in my original situation, I'm telling A's coach that one of his player has to leave the game? I'm fully supportive of enforcing the rule to the letter here, I'd just want something to say to a coach beyond "that's the rule, sorry."[/QUOTE]
Well I guess you could be more specific and say "once we brought in A7 he became a player so someone has to come out." If you want you can add "A7 doesn't have to play if you want to send in a sub for him."

[Rich1]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

I'd just want something to say to a coach beyond "that's the rule, sorry."

What else is there to say? By rule, once A7 is on the court to replace A2 then A7 is now a player, A2 is now bench personnel, and A2 must sit a tick before reentering the game. I would all some leeway if the coach is changing his mind quickly or if A7 obviously said the wrong number but once A2 is on his way to the bench and the intent is clear then A2 is sitting. However it gets explained to the coach is fine with me as long as it takes very little time to do it.