Conflict in time out rules?

[ljudge]

I'm reviewing timing rules today and have been meaning to ask this of the forum for a while. There appears to be a conflict in the rules regarding timeouts with equipment. I would like to know if anyone can clear this up.

3.5.5.b - After a team has used its permissible charged time-outs for the half, any subsequent request shall be denied unless it is for necessary repair to player equipment. (sounds good - makes sense).

3.5.6 - If repair of equipment without the assistance of a team attendant delays the ready-for-play signal for more than 25 seconds, or requires the assistance of a team attendant(s) and the player's team has used all permissible time-outs, the player shall be replaced for at least one down.

3.5.7.e - An official's time-out occurs during a dead ball without a time-out being charged to either team for a player in need of equipment repair.

The 2nd two rules here seem to conflict as to when a player is required to take a time out, leave the field, etc.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Not quite sure I understand what you mean. Let's remove 3-5-5b from the discussion since you see no conflict there. Here's the way I see the other two rules coming into play:

First, if a official notices equipment in need of repair, or if a player points it out to him, the official calls an official's time out rather than charging the team with a TO. (3-5-7e)

Secondly, as long as the player can complete the repair without the assistance of a team attendant and do so without delaying the RFP for more than 25 seconds, everything's good, it stays an official's TO and we blow the RFP when the repair is completed. (3-5-6)

However, if he delays the RFP for more than 25 seconds or requires the assistance of a team attendant, then he must take a charged TO if he wants to continue the repair and remain in the game. All this rule says is that if he has no more TOs remaining, then he has no options; he must leave for a play. Of course in such cases, what you see most often is the player just being replaced and fixing the problem on the sideline rather than having to take a charged TO.

Where do you see the conflict?

[ljudge]

I think I see the difference. It's how I was reading it I guess. I was seeing it on one hand as an official's timeout vs. a team's timeout. 3.5.7e seems to be an officials timeout with the condition that it must not delay the rfp by 25 seconds. In other words 3.5.6 is almost an extension to 3.6.7b. Something like "it's an officials timeout to repair equipment UNLESS it delays the RFP by more than 25 seconds..." Difficult to articulate but again I think I see the difference.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: I think that's it: "You've got a problem with your equipment, I'll take the time out. Just don't take too long or require anyone from the sidelines to help. Otherwise, I need to charge the TO to your team. And if you have no TOs remaining, then you must leave for a play."

It's sort of the reverse of a coach-referee conference, where it's a charged time out for the first minute. Then any extension required becomes an official's TO. Of course, if you find out that you goofed, the whole thing becomes an official's TO.

[ljudge]

OK, getting technical what if a player loses a mouthpiece and says "ref I need a new mouthpiece" after the RFP has been given? I would expect criticism of not following "common sense" if I made the team take a timeout. But I would technically be following the rules if I made a player to that. Would you agree?

I actually had this very situation come up last year and I simply stopped the game and allowed the player to go over to the sideline and someone threw him another one. I re-chopped and we resumed play. No one questioned it but I probably didn't follow the rules properly.

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by ljudge
OK, getting technical what if a player loses a mouthpiece and says "ref I need a new mouthpiece" after the RFP has been given? I would expect criticism of not following "common sense" if I made the team take a timeout. But I would technically be following the rules if I made a player to that. Would you agree?

I actually had this very situation come up last year and I simply stopped the game and allowed the player to go over to the sideline and someone threw him another one. I re-chopped and we resumed play. No one questioned it but I probably didn't follow the rules properly.

REPLY: I don't see anything wrong with taking an official's TO and allowing that. I believe that the intention of prohibiting help from the sideline is meant to keep attendants from entering the field/huddle to help repair equipment that has become illegal through use. Just having sideline personnel throw a new mouthpiece onto the field doesn't really appear to violate that principle. If they weren't prepared to get him a new mouthpiece quickly, I would suggest that they get a replacement in for him and let him address the problem on the sideline while the game continues. I think common sense should prevail. Now...that's my opinion; others may disagree.

[LJ845]

I concur with Bob M. Common sense has to dictate how you interpret and rule on this. Although he "technically" received assistance from the sideline, I believe the intent is to keep the flow of the game moving and to not create unnecessary delays that could create an advantage/disadvantage situation for a team.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by ljudge
I'm reviewing timing rules today and have been meaning to ask this of the forum for a while. There appears to be a conflict in the rules regarding timeouts with equipment. I would like to know if anyone can clear this up.

3.5.5.b - After a team has used its permissible charged time-outs for the half, any subsequent request shall be denied unless it is for necessary repair to player equipment. (sounds good - makes sense).

3.5.6 - If repair of equipment without the assistance of a team attendant delays the ready-for-play signal for more than 25 seconds, or requires the assistance of a team attendant(s) and the player's team has used all permissible time-outs, the player shall be replaced for at least one down.

3.5.7.e - An official's time-out occurs during a dead ball without a time-out being charged to either team for a player in need of equipment repair.

The 2nd two rules here seem to conflict as to when a player is required to take a time out, leave the field, etc.

LJ, you might want to use dashes for rules and dots for case plays like the books do, so as to not confuse anyone.

I believe the key issue is that the player must be replaced if the team has no timeouts or if they choose not to use one. That's really the purpose of 3-5-6.