Illegal substitution?

Raymond

johnsonboys03 wrote
I don't normally talk that way but you struck a nerve. For you to talk to people as if there inferior does not make a productive forum. I would think we would all want a rules based open discussion. But that's just me.

Someone had already posted the rule with specific wording that tells you exactly when A6 becomes a player.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Nevadaref

Rich wrote
His post was deleted for being against the rules here.

I wouldn't let him call you a name, either. I'm certainly not going to let him call *me* a name.

Quoting that deleted post just isn't going to happen.

I'm not concerned with the name-calling. I'm bothered that you deleted my post and the quoted point of it. It was something that he could have learned from. You could have simply blocked out the name that he called you without nixing the rest of my post. Instead you were lazy and opted to delete the whole thing. His post was right about one thing--this isn't Rich.com.

johnsonboys03

BadNewsRef wrote
Someone had already posted the rule with specific wording that tells you exactly when A6 becomes a player.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

What were the specific words? That is what I'm looking for. Of it was ignored it was not with intent.

BigCat

Nevadaref wrote
Not true. Players remain players during time-outs. If a substitute reports during a time-out and then subsequently enters the inbounds area, he has met the rule requirements to become a player and replace one of the five players.

I agree players remain players during timeouts. However, I do not agree that bench personnel can become players during the timeout. When the timeout is over and they enter the court I believe they become a player. Part of the Court during timeouts is called the timeout area. I also believe the player who reports during the timeout, runs back to huddle on floor can be withdrawn and player he was going to replace can stay in.

johnsonboys03

BadNewsRef wrote
Someone had already posted the rule with specific wording that tells you exactly when A6 becomes a player.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Rule3-3-4
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.

Welpe

Nevadaref wrote
I'm not concerned with the name-calling. I'm bothered that you deleted my post and the quoted point of it. It was something that he could have learned from. You could have simply blocked out the name that he called you without nixing the rest of my post. Instead you were lazy and opted to delete the whole thing. His post was right about one thing--this isn't Rich.com.

You breaking out the red pen doesn't do anything productive in this thread except try to make yourself look smarter. If you're so concerned about his spelling and grammar, send him a PM.

We're done talking about this.

Adam

Grammar Nazi stuff isn't a good enough reason to feign ignorance. You could have just as easily removed the offending words once you realized they were being deleted if you wanted to pick on his typos.

It's time to move on from this, though, and keep it on topic.

johnsonboys03

BadNewsRef wrote
Someone had already posted the rule with specific wording that tells you exactly when A6 becomes a player.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

I would like everyone to read case play 3-3-1 stuation F
It is not the same situation, and it Is to lengthy to type, but It does say that "substitutes become players when they legally enter the court, in this case, when the referee beckoned them into the court.

Rich

johnsonboys03 wrote
I would like everyone to read case play 3-3-1 stuation F
It is not the same situation, and it Is to lengthy to type, but It does say that "substitutes become players when they legally enter the court, in this case, when the referee beckoned them into the court.

No.

I can beckon a substitute and a coach can still call that person back.

johnsonboys03

Rich wrote
You've granted a timeout. What are the rules on substituting during a timeout? They apply as soon as the timeout is granted.

(I'll let you find those. )

case play 3-3-1 stuation F
It is not the same situation, and it Is to lengthy to type, but It does say that "substitutes become players when they legally enter the court, in this case, when the referee beckoned them into the court.

BigCat

johnsonboys03 wrote
I would like everyone to read case play 3-3-1 stuation F
It is not the same situation, and it Is to lengthy to type, but It does say that "substitutes become players when they legally enter the court, in this case, when the referee beckoned them into the court.

The play 3.3.1f says the players "are beckoned into the game AND ENTER the court. Beckoning alone is not enough.

Rich

johnsonboys03 wrote
case play 3-3-1 stuation F
It is not the same situation, and it Is to lengthy to type, but It does say that "substitutes become players when they legally enter the court, in this case, when the referee beckoned them into the court.

See above.

What's still unclear is why any official would beckon a player after granting and administering a timeout. That procedure is already covered in the rules and those subs do not *require* beckoning by an official.

johnsonboys03

Rich wrote
See above.

What's still unclear is why any official would beckon a player after granting and administering a timeout. That procedure is already covered in the rules and those subs do not *require* beckoning by an official.

Yes I did read that In the substitution rule. But In this case the player was at the Table before the time out was granted. Do you just ignore them and look over there head and grant the time out? That question isn't a challenge it truly is me asking?
In the original post the referee beckoned the player in the game before REPORTING the timeout.

johnsonboys03

BigCat wrote
The play 3.3.1f says the players "are beckoned into the game AND ENTER the court. Beckoning alone is not enough.

That isn't the way 3-3-1 situation F reads. I'm looking for it in the rule book that defines when a player is legally on the court. With this in black and white I would say the beckoning is what makes him legal.

BigCat

johnsonboys03 wrote
That isn't the way 3-3-1 situation F reads. I'm looking for it in the rule book that defines when a player is legally on the court. With this in black and white I would say the beckoning is what makes him legal.

Second sentence says it. I've cited multiple rules. If your partner beckoned the player and he ENTERED the court(inbounds) before timeout was granted he became a player. If the timeout was granted without him entering he did not become a player. Look also at 3-3-2 (rules have dashes). You will see that beckoning is one thing and entering is another.

Rich

johnsonboys03 wrote
Yes I did read that In the substitution rule. But In this case the player was at the Table before the time out was granted. Do you just ignore them and look over there head and grant the time out? That question isn't a challenge it truly is me asking?
In the original post the referee beckoned the player in the game before REPORTING the timeout.

Yes, you do.

Coach calls the timeout, you find out if it's a 30 or 60 and then you go to the table.

By now, the player should already be heading over to the team huddle. If not, I'm not beckoning the player.

johnsonboys03

BigCat wrote
Second sentence says it. I've cited multiple rules. If your partner beckoned the player and he ENTERED the court(inbounds) before timeout was granted he became a player. If the timeout was granted without him entering he did not become a player. Look also at 3-3-2 (rules have dashes). You will see that beckoning is one thing and entering is another.

I did use dashes. That was Bigcat that used decimals. But thank you for your input

BigCat

johnsonboys03 wrote
That isn't the way 3-3-1 situation F reads. I'm looking for it in the rule book that defines when a player is legally on the court. With this in black and white I would say the beckoning is what makes him legal.

Case plays are decimals. Rules are dashes. The proper cite is 3.3.1F.

johnsonboys03

BigCat wrote
The play 3.3.1f says the players "are beckoned into the game AND ENTER the court. Beckoning alone is not enough.

Read the ruling in that situation

BillyMac

Rich wrote
... how many angels can fit on the head of a pin ...

johnsonboys03 wrote
... there is a legitimate question here. Not as silly as you make it seem.

Agree. Take it a step further and assume that either A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, or A6 decides to mouth off, using profanity, to an official. Is the coach seatbelted (technical foul on bench personnel), or not (technical foul on a player)? We don't need to know how may angels can fit on the head of a pin (a metaphor for wasting time debating topics of no practical value), but we do need to know answers to questions posed in this thread, like who's a player, and who is bench personnel.

« Previous Page Next Page »