USA rules....sub rule

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Antonio.King

I'm going to disagree with you on this. It's not about looking for trouble, but about following protocol. They've made a partially legal sub request as you're acknowledging the presence of both substitutions, but you're administering them one by one.

They're requesting two substitutions; one of which they can have, however, the other they cannot due to it being the maximum allowed number. With that in mind, you have to deny the request of the sub that would make the 13th.

So it's an improper request in addition to allowing the 12th sub.

I'm going to disagree. You have one request. You can only make one request for substitution (in which you can make several at a time, all as part of the same request). This is one request. If you issue an improper request, you're saying there were multiple requests, which there were not.

[Antonio.King]

Originally Posted by FMadera

I'm going to disagree. You have one request. You can only make one request for substitution (in which you can make several at a time, all as part of the same request). This is one request. If you issue an improper request, you're saying there were multiple requests, which there were not.

Yes, you're right in the sense that only one request for substitution can be made, and that's by a player entering the sub zone. You're also correct in the sense that a team is allowed as many entries in the same dead ball request.

For a team to make multiple substitutions in the same dead ball, they need to be waiting outside the sub zone until the first pair is clear. In this instance, they are to be considered acknowledged under the same initial request.

15.10.14: "If a team intends to make simultaneously more than one substitution, all players being substituted must report to the substitution zone at the same time to be considered in the same request."

You're not inferring multiple requests in this instance considering their request is still being acknowledged. Just because the first sub has received authorization to enter doesn't mean their request is complete because they have another pair awaiting entry. Per 15.10.14, they're making a single request to allow multiple substitutions; when multiple pairs arrive, they are to be treated as one request. You allow their legal request (12th), but deny the 13th due to being over their maximum allowed number, thus making it an improper request.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Antonio.King

You allow their legal request (12th), but deny the 13th due to being over their maximum allowed number, thus making it an improper request.

...if you want to officiate entirely by the book, and not by what is best practices. When they both come up, you remind them they can only have one, and the other one should then go back without you having to deny anything.

Let's say #5 comes into the sub zone, and the coach realizes that #6 should be subbing in instead. You sub in #6, #5 goes back to the bench, and we play on without further sanction unless there is a delay in the match.

Let's also say #5 steps into the sub zone for request 13, then realizes they are out of subs before you blow the whistle. No improper request here; they go back to the bench and we play on.

Same principle. We would treat that second player as if he is not part of the equation at all (if and ONLY if there isn't a delay caused by said action), administer the correct sub without delay, and we play on. Again...don't look for trouble, or you'll find it.

Antonio, your answer may be "correct" by the strictest interpretation of the rule, but if you handle it that way in a rating session, you're more likely to get dinged for it than if you handle it the way I describe. Trust me.

[oldsetter]

Interesting responses. I handle it like Felix. Let's say number 5 comes into the sub zone for the 2nd sub and number 16 is waiting outside the sub zone. You blow your whistle recognizing the sub, 16 realizes she is early and goes back to the bench....I'm putting 5 in the game and going on with no penalty. There is no delay. I don't think when a player comes into the sub zone there is an implied number or there is a definitive number of inches that the second or third player are required to be from the attach line. If a second player comes up a 'little late'...before I have finished confirming the scorekeeper has recorded the 1st sub, (not too outside my rhythm) I will allow the second sub as well...with a warning to be more timely next time. Game administrator versus rules police.
Good discussion friends.

[Antonio.King]

What the defining factor in all of this is whether or not as the R2, you acknowledge their request with a whistle or not while the two subs are waiting (the 12th and the 13th). If you're preventative, which I think is what you're getting at Felix, then yes, catch it before either of them enters the zone.

However, if you're unable to (handling something with the other team or just don't realize it), then the process involves the IR should the R2 whistle it.

I was speaking from the stand point that you whistled the request with the pending outside. In which case, you have to issue the IR. If you catch it before you acknowledge the request, then you don't.

[MCBear]

I was going to agree with Felix until I read this exact situation in the Case Book (page 46).

Situation 15.22
A team requests two substitutions which will result in the 12th and 13th team substitutions.

Ruling:
The second referee allows one substitution, denies the other, and charges the team with an improper request. When a substitution request includes a legal and an improper substitution, the legal substitute may enter the set. In this case, the coach or captain may decide which substitution is preferred, provided this is done without delay.

Reference:
USAV 15.6a
USAV 15.9.1c
USAV 15.10.4a

So, according to this, the IR is the proper procedure.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by MCBear

I was going to agree with Felix until I read this exact situation in the Case Book (page 46).





So, according to this, the IR is the proper procedure.

Again, I think this is assuming we have lost track of the sub count (the casebook doesn't usually take into account preventative actions). The scorer is telling the R2 no, they can only use one, then we have to take care of making sure which one they want, etc., so there is a penalty that CAN be assessed, but doesn't necessarily need to be.

We can assess a penalty (not a yellow card, just the generic definition) for an overlap, and yet, we can also warn and prevent things from getting to that point. I see this as no different IF the R2 is aware of things and can deal with it quickly.