Another substitution one

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Lcubed48

I agree with Bob, and disagree with your partner. However, I wouldn't make an issue of it right then. That's what a post-game is for.

The players self-regulated themselves in an effort to speed up the sub process, and now we're going to penalize them for it. Not in my book! Game management.

Rule 10-2 Penalty 2 says "After a team is charged with UD, no further substitutions may be requested by that team until the next completed rally.".

I have asked both my association president and the administrator for the state association about this and have received two slightly different responses.

officials association president: The UD should be issued for #8 being withdrawn, but the other two were legally entries therefore they should have been allowed to remain in the match at that point. The UD was not issued until after the other two legally entered, therefore it was not a subsequent request.


State association. No penalty should have been issued since all players had approached the zone at the same time. Since #7 and #1 went in and then #8 was withdrawn, the casebook situation 10-2-7-A was the basis for her ruling. Since there was no actual delay in the substitution procedure, the substitute can be withdrawn in a multiple substitution procedure.

The player who was coming off the floor did not delay in come over. IIRC not only was she on the opposite side of the floor, she had gone to get the ball from the other side of the gym. I am not penalizing the act of helping the game move along with an UD.

One thing about the new rule is the terminology. The rule says no subsequent substitution requests shall be granted. The act of multiple players approaching the substitution request isn't a subsequent request, it is a single request for multiple substitutions.

Had there been a delay between when #8 left the bench and triggered the substitution request and when #7 and #1 left the bench to substitute and #8 were withdrawn, then we would have had a subsequent request which we shouldn't have allowed anyway due to the fact they all did not report at the same time.