Unreported sub or illegal sub

[Dakota]

What would you do? Answer the question.

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by Dakota

What would you do? Answer the question.

Dakota,
I'm not sure where this is going...

FWIW, here is what I would do.

After the sub was given to me and (before I accepted it) I noticed it would be illegal, I would inform the coach that the substitution would be illegal - he can't do it.
I can't imagine him insisting I make the substitution, BUT if she did, I'd accept it. record it, announce it.

Then when I put the ball in play, I'd have to stop play and enforce the illegal player penalty.

I can't imagine it getting to that, but, that's all I can figure to do.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by HugoTafurst

Dakota,
I'm not sure where this is going...

FWIW, here is what I would do.

After the sub was given to me and (before I accepted it) I noticed it would be illegal, I would inform the coach that the substitution would be illegal - he can't do it.
I can't imagine him insisting I make the substitution, BUT if she did,

Speaking ASA,

To start, lets note that there is no "illegal substitution" in ASA. You have an "unreported substitute" or an "illegal player".

At this point, you have already warned the coach that this substitution was a violation of the rules. If the coach then insisted on violating the rule after a warning, the game is over. (ASA 5.4.F) Extreme, absolutely. However, when you tell the coach that if s/he insist on making the change the game will be forfeited, most likely the issue would disappear.

I'd accept it. record it, announce it.

Then when I put the ball in play, I'd have to stop play and enforce the illegal player penalty.

Well, you cannot do that. If the violation is deemed that of an illegal player, this must be protested by the offended team. (ASA 4.6.E)

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Speaking ASA,

To start, lets note that there is no "illegal substitution" in ASA. You have an "unreported substitute" or an "illegal player".

At this point, you have already warned the coach that this substitution was a violation of the rules. If the coach then insisted on violating the rule after a warning, the game is over. (ASA 5.4.F) Extreme, absolutely. However, when you tell the coach that if s/he insist on making the change the game will be forfeited, most likely the issue would disappear.



Well, you cannot do that. If the violation is deemed that of an illegal player, this must be protested by the offended team. (ASA 4.6.E)

(For the record, I'm aware that there is no such thing as an illegal sub - just worded it the way I did because substituting an illegal player would be, well, illegal - or as you so accurately put it, a violation of the rules)....)

Be that as it may, I wouldn't really expect the coach to continue with the substitution anyway, but in the unlikely event that she did I now know the next step.

Thanks

(edited to add):

Just got back to my desk and realized that my original answer camer from NFHS (with which I am more familiar than ASA).

NFHS 3-4 recognizes an illegal substitute and that

"Illegal offensive or defensive players may be discovered by the
umpire or either team anytime after the ball becomes live and an illegal substitute
has taken a position as:
a. a runner she has replaced or as a batter in the batter's box;
b. a pitcher on the pitcher's plate, or as a fielder reaching a position usually
occupied by the fielder being replaced; or
c. a courtesy runner if that player has violated the courtesy-runner rule."

I'll check my shirt before deciding how to handle the situation..... ;-)


Either way, I still think it is pretty unlikely that after being informed of the situation, it is unlikely that head coach would continue with the illegal substitution (or substitution of an illegal player).

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Speaking ASA, [snip] If the violation is deemed that of an illegal player, this must be protested by the offended team. (ASA 4.6.E)

Per the book, why is an unreported substitute (4.6.B) or an illegal player (4.6.E) handled as a protest rather than an appeal? A protest may mean stopping the game and finding the UIC.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

Per the book, why is an unreported substitute (4.6.B) or an illegal player (4.6.E) handled as a protest rather than an appeal? A protest may mean stopping the game and finding the UIC.

Speculation, mind you, but here are several reasons:

1) When the rules were changed (several times, actually, but I have a totally rewritten section in the 1999 book), they didn't propose to add another item to the finite list of appeals in the book. Could have been proposed by the authors, or the editors could have addressed the issue; obviously not.

2) All appeals, as defined, are actually violations by the offense that only the defense can initiate a call. The rulebook editors of that time wouldn't have accepted this as an "appeal" because these violations CAN be made by the defense and the "protest" invoked by the offense (AND even by the umpire in NFHS).

3) Simply a poor choice of words. These aren't actually handled as a protest, despite the rule wording. Has anyone ever demanded a protest fee and then brought the UIC or Protest Committee over to address the "protest" of an unreported sub or illegal player? Of course not.

Hate to say it, but NCAA rules are more accurate here; they don't use appeal OR protest, as both are incorrect. NCAA simply addresses that the violations are REPORTED by the offended team, and then ruled on appropriately.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by umpire12

lol..no fair...you used a dictionary........ok..you win...i wish you the best

What you seem to be missing here, and what Tom is trying to get you to see in a round about way, is that Mike (Irishmafia), offered no other course of action than either Tom or myself had previously posited. Yet, only because he took it to the absolutely extreme of what he would do if the coach insisted on taking an illegal course of action after being told by the umpire it was an illegal course of action, you seem to think there was some epiphany. This is what we would all have done when pushed to that point. Yet, as noted by Tom in an earlier post, it will never come to that because when you tell a coach something is illegal, they always take the legal course of action,

Now, the reason I put part of the previous paragraph in bold and italic type is this; your initial argument with myself was because I had mentioned that I would tell the coach that the substitution they were wanting to make was illegal. Both Tom and myself asked you how you would handle, then, and you never gave us an answer. You still haven't given an answer. However, by the fact that you now agree so wholeheartedly with Mike, establishing the fact that you have learned and grown as an umpire, is it safe to assume that you would now, in fact, tell the coach trying to make an illegal substitution that they action they were taking was illegal? Has this changed your belief that an umpire refusing to take an illegal substitution is, in some form or fashion, coaching?

[CecilOne]

sorry all, just a note to read this when I have more time

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by HugoTafurst

Dakota,
I'm not sure where this is going...

Where this was going was trying to get our friend to quit being a troll and actually say what HE would do.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by umpire12

there is no need to resort to name calling or labeling..

What do you call someone who only argues and offers nothing positive to a discussion?

And, the difference between Mike's response and mine is he threatened to forfeit the game, and I would've told the coach to sit down. I guess he would win the protest, but lose the game by forfeit as a result? Sure, that would happen.

In reality, neither my ultimate response nor Mike's would ever happen. I've dealt with this situation (coach wanting to do something that he can't with the lineup) many times, and the coach always, without fail, and without argument, makes a legal choice.

You, OTOH, would apparently fill out an illegal lineup and see if anyone notices. Thanks for finally answering the question. It sure seemed like you apparently wanted everyone else (but not you) to answer your questions so you could argue more.

[Dakota]

Yet, you refused repeated requests to actually answer the question while pressing the argument to greater levels of absurdity.

Originally Posted by umpire12

...you just became a better umpire by merely exchanging rhetoric....

Speak for yourself.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by umpire12

theres that word argument again..im not sure why you choose to draw a negative from such a positive opportunity to grow as an umpire..i suppose when one rebuts a counterpoint you consider it an argument. a prerequisite for an argument i think would be anger. im not angry, you seem to be..a second prerequisite would be for both sides to state a position. as you astutely noticed, i didnt. i merely suggested different possibilities and considerations.....as far as speaking for myself, i was hoping i was speaking for both of us...remember, when youre through learning, youre through as an umpire

You obviously do not understand the meaning of the word "argument", tending to focus on the very narrow meaning of quarrel. That is your problem, not mine. Here, maybe this will help:

Definition of ARGUMENT
: a reason given in proof or rebuttal
: discourse intended to persuade
: a coherent series of statements leading from a premise to a conclusion

And, quit using your narrow understanding of the language to attempt to assign emotion to my typed words, or to my thinking behind them.

No, I learned nothing about umpiring from your arguments; perhaps I did learn a bit about you.