Time Out before Illegal Substitution
 

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

D.

Perhaps A in C-Level SubV games.

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. That's why having 12 on the field before the snap is a foul. The defense can't prepare if they don't know who will be playing.

Even at varsity?

The penalty happened (if it didn't happen earlier) when the huddle broke. There is no other penalty you're going to waive off if they call a time out after it happened... so why this one?

This isn't true anymore. Technically they can break the huddle with 12 as long as the replaced player is leaving the field within 3 seconds being notified he's replaced..

Rule 3-7-1: Between downs any number of eligible substitutes may replace players. Replaced players shall leave the field within three seconds.

I am speaking varsity and my crew has been having this same conversation about this call for 2 weeks now :)

For the record, we granted the TO and did not throw the flag but upon further thinking I am still saying we should have thrown the flag and then asked if he still wanted the TO.

If the flag is not already out and on the ground, then grant the TO with no penalty (and especially no "option"). I don't particularly care what level you may be talking about, unless of course you are talking NCAA and A is breaking the huddle with 12 or more.

Fed/NCAA difference. Legal to break the huddle with 12 in Fed.

I agree with Mike L. I do not see the team gaining an unfair advantage so no post-TO flag.

Argh. My bad. I SHOULD assume questions are FED when not listed, but I can't teach myself to do that apparently.

OK, Fed - if the sub entered and the replaced player did not leave in the prescribed amount of time - you have a penalty. Just as i said before, you don't waive off the penalty if a time out happened after it.

I've just been working on illegal substitution, because we messed one up last Friday.

FED has both live-ball and dead-ball IS. For a dead-ball IS (replaced player fails to leave within 3 seconds), you would have to determine whether the coach requested the TO before the foul occurred. Penalize only if the TO request came after the foul, and ask the coach if he still wants the TO.

For a live-ball IS (replaced player is running off the field but does not make it prior to the snap), this is not a foul until the snap. Provided the coach requests a TO prior to the snap, it is not a foul. Shouldn't have to wave off a flag because there shouldn't be one.

See Case Book, 3.7 COMMENT

I should add that as I reread it, the OP sounds like dead-ball IS, since the official was recounting 12. If you're counting twice, then the foul occurred before the TO request; penalize and give the coach the option to withdraw the request.

Of course he requested a TO before the foul occurred :) ;)

If I can't get the players counted and the flag on the ground before the TO request, I'll grant the TO without a penalty.

I agree. I don't see where an advantage has been gained.

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.

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.

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

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

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.

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

it isn't advantage disadvantage
 

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.

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.

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.

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.

I have no foul if I have not flagged it.

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?

This thread makes me sad.

Mike, with all due respect, you are entitled to YOUR judgment, just as others who may assess circumstances somewhat differently. "One size" has never and will will never fit all. The single most important quality an official brings to the table is solid judgment, which includes not only determining whether some action violates the language of a rule, but whether that action violates the intent of that rule to the extent of justifying the proscribed penalty.

Advantage/Disadvantage is a serious concept that underscores the overall management of a game and the application of the rules as applied to that game. Our responsibilities go far beyond simply knowing the rules and being able to recognize violations. We are given, "authority to rule promptly, and in the spirit of good sportmanship, on any situation not specifically covered in the rule" (NF:1-1-6) as well as, "authority to make decisions for infractions of the rule."(NF: 1-1-9). These are extremely broad and open ended descriptions deliberately and for good reason.

In the majority of situations, the judgments are clear and instantaneous, however there is an overarching standard of "does whatever was done gain, or cause, an unfair advantage". If not, does the act deserve the penalty, or some lesser admonition or caution, like a "talking to". These are decisions made EVERY game at EVERY level and the consistency of those decisions are limited to THAT game only. (We should arrive at judgments consistently, but the actual judgments made are based on the game being played).

Sometimes precision enforcement is the appropriate consideration, other times sound judgment is the key factor, and no two games are exactly alike.

I'm aware that advantage/disadvantage is a serious concept. I fail to see how it applies to any (ANY!) pre-snap fouls. And I can think of no other foul where a coach calling timeout between the time of the foul and the hankie hitting the ground would nullify the penalty. The speed of our thinking, reacting should never come into play... yet several here have said that they would let it.

Disappointing, really.

Delay of game
 

a delay of game penalty is another one that can be "bought" by a time out in my opinion....failure to properly wear equipment (ie Wide out has left his mouthpiece out....official and coach see it at the same time...snap is imminent official reaches for flag...coach calls time out)