Time Out before Illegal Substitution

[MD Longhorn]

I have to admit I'm supremely surprised at the number of officials blowing off this foul. There are rules that we are supposed to weigh advantage / disadvantage (holding away from the play, for example). This is not one of them. Ignoring this foul, to me, is like ignoring a false start on your side of the line because the play went the other way.

Regardless of ruleset, IS happens WHEN IT HAPPENS. If you're already recounting the 12 ... it happened. This is not an advantage/disadvantage type of foul. They broke the rule when the replaced player didn't leave (FED) or they broke the huddle (NCAA). A time out after the fact cannot negate what has already happened.

I'm completely amazed at the number of you (most of whom I know (from here) and respect (also from here)) ignoring this foul over a subsequent time out. This seems to me to be VERY contrary to the spirit of the rule.

To those ignoring this foul ... if the sub comes in, doesn't leave, you count... you start to recount (5 seconds ... 6 seconds) and THEN a player leaves the huddle --- do you ignore it then? What if he leaves the huddle and THEN the coach calls a time out? Too much inconsistency in ignoring this, to me. And no, I'm not exactly known as an OOO.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I have to admit I'm supremely surprised at the number of officials blowing off this foul. There are rules that we are supposed to weigh advantage / disadvantage (holding away from the play, for example). This is not one of them. Ignoring this foul, to me, is like ignoring a false start on your side of the line because the play went the other way.

Regardless of ruleset, IS happens WHEN IT HAPPENS. If you're already recounting the 12 ... it happened. This is not an advantage/disadvantage type of foul. They broke the rule when the replaced player didn't leave (FED) or they broke the huddle (NCAA). A time out after the fact cannot negate what has already happened.

I'm completely amazed at the number of you (most of whom I know (from here) and respect (also from here)) ignoring this foul over a subsequent time out. This seems to me to be VERY contrary to the spirit of the rule.

To those ignoring this foul ... if the sub comes in, doesn't leave, you count... you start to recount (5 seconds ... 6 seconds) and THEN a player leaves the huddle --- do you ignore it then? What if he leaves the huddle and THEN the coach calls a time out? Too much inconsistency in ignoring this, to me. And no, I'm not exactly known as an OOO.

Delaying a substitution or attempting to play with 12 players is an advantage for the team doing it so this is most definitely an advantage/disadvantage foul. If I'm the d-coordinator, I may call my play based on what personnel you have and if you have an extra player, I'm at a disadvantage.

The difference in your last situation is that you caught the issue before the time out because you recognized the foul quickly. You have no idea if they will call time out to correct the situation before the snap. If they are able to get the time out before anyone throws a flag, the advantage they had with the extra player goes away. They will get their 11 players corrected and the defense will be able to adjust.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Delaying a substitution or attempting to play with 12 players is an advantage for the team doing it so this is most definitely an advantage/disadvantage foul. If I'm the d-coordinator, I may call my play based on what personnel you have and if you have an extra player, I'm at a disadvantage.

I believe you missed my point entirely. All fouls are in the book because allowing them creates some sort of unwanted advantage. of COURSE playing with 12 is an advantage, or even having 12 out there.

My point, however, was this is not a foul where the referee should think - did the act create a disadvantage? And if not, ignore the foul (which some above have said, nearly word for word.). This foul is a foul when it happens.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Dukat

Situation: You are counting players, do the 2nd count to be sure and as you are reaching for your flag to throw the illegal substitution penalty the offending coach calls timeout with the linesman.

Do you:
A) Grant TO and leave it at that
B) Grant TO and throw flag for IS
C) Deny TO and throw flag
D) Throw flag and ask if he still wants TO
E) Something else I am not thinking of

CANADIAN RULING:

Substitution fouls occur at the snap, so any valid TO request trumps this foul.

[Dukat]

Once again, This is the issue my crew had with it.

Looking back, I feel we should have thrown the flag. If I am honest w/ myself, I will admit that my hand was on the flag when I heard the whistle from the side for the TO. The foul had occurred, it just had not been called yet.

For those asking, I was inferring to a pre-snap, dead ball call would have been made.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Dukat

Once again, This is the issue my crew had with it.

Looking back, I feel we should have thrown the flag. If I am honest w/ myself, I will admit that my hand was on the flag when I heard the whistle from the side for the TO. The foul had occurred, it just had not been called yet.

For those asking, I was inferring to a pre-snap, dead ball call would have been made.

I think you should have flagged it anyway. I'm not going to crucify you for it though - obviously there are more here that share your view than mine!!! Much to my surprise.

[Dukat]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I think you should have flagged it anyway. I'm not going to crucify you for it though - obviously there are more here that share your view than mine!!! Much to my surprise.

Actually I share your view, I just did not act on it at the time

[cmathews]

Mcrowder I understand your position here. I also think you are misreading how others are viewing it. It isn't advantage disadvantage, it is the cost of the penalty. To me if the coach wants to spend a timeout to "buy" this penalty, then the "cost" is equal or more. IMHO

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by cmathews

Mcrowder I understand your position here. I also think you are misreading how others are viewing it. It isn't advantage disadvantage, it is the cost of the penalty. To me if the coach wants to spend a timeout to "buy" this penalty, then the "cost" is equal or more. IMHO

Fair enough. However, are there any other penalties we would allow a coach to buy back by using a timeout AFTER the infraction? Obviously to that coach, the cost is not equal ... or more (and why is it the official's decision as to whether this is a "fair" price or not?). I just can't understand how the speed at which the referee can confirm and flag this foul should have anything to do with whether it gets called or not. Seems patently unfair and contrary to rule.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by cmathews

Mcrowder I understand your position here. I also think you are misreading how others are viewing it. It isn't advantage disadvantage, it is the cost of the penalty. To me if the coach wants to spend a timeout to "buy" this penalty, then the "cost" is equal or more. IMHO

I don't think fairness permits buying your way out of IS with a time out. I do think, however, that the coach should have the option to withdraw the request once he learns he's being penalized 5 yards anyway.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

A

Because they took the time out they didn't gain an unfair advantage by disguising who their 11 will be on the next play.

I could fairly easily imagine circumstances in which they would have, if they wait to call time out depending on how they see the defense react. OK, not much of an advantage, but watching the other team prepare to substitute could be a little more useful if your 12th lingers a bit.

Still, I would hope the answer to be A.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Fair enough. However, are there any other penalties we would allow a coach to buy back by using a timeout AFTER the infraction? Obviously to that coach, the cost is not equal ... or more (and why is it the official's decision as to whether this is a "fair" price or not?). I just can't understand how the speed at which the referee can confirm and flag this foul should have anything to do with whether it gets called or not. Seems patently unfair and contrary to rule.

That's if you agree that the infraction actually exists once the timeout is acknowledged. Frankly, I've already stopped counting and am signaling the timeout by then.

[parepat]

I have no foul if I have not flagged it.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: mbcrowder...i do agree that you're technically correct. However, if faced with that situation, I would grant the TO and leave the flag in my pocket. The possibility of an advantage for the offending team is pretty much gone once they call the TO. And on top of that, they've disadvantaged themselves by having to call a worthless timeout-due-to-stupidity. Just MHO.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Bob M.

REPLY: mbcrowder...i do agree that you're technically correct. However, if faced with that situation, I would grant the TO and leave the flag in my pocket. The possibility of an advantage for the offending team is pretty much gone once they call the TO. And on top of that, they've disadvantaged themselves by having to call a worthless timeout-due-to-stupidity. Just MHO.

I can live with that, Bob. However, if you have laundry on the ground, you're not going to wave it off and grant the TO, are you?