Delayed substitution

[Sonny]

Had a delayed substitution situation last night in OT of a High School game. How/where do you draw the line behind these two rule interpretations regarding "delayed substitutions" under current NCAA rules? How does Federation rules differ (if at all) on this same topic?

(Illegal Procedure) - Failing to comply with any rules for entering play, either intentionally or unintentionally.

(Unsportsmanlike Conduct) - AR 24 - Team A hides its 10th man in the penalty-box area for the purpose of slipping him into the game during Team A's clearing attempt. Ruling: Personal Foul, unsportsmanlike conduct.

[Tim Gray]

We had two different situations the other night.

1. Our attackman came off and the sub i wanted took longer than he should've to get to the field. but since the play was at the other end, the ref didn't call it.

2. similar situation happened, but we wound up getting the ball in transition, and our attackman came on and had an advantage. Ball was awarded to other team b/c the substitution caused an unfair advantage.

[Danny Hogan]

had something similar in a hs game i was coaching.

we picked up the ball, were advancing down field, LSM had come off the field into the box, shorty had not entered the field to replace him.

We turned it over, LSM who was still in the box turned around and went back on the field.

Flagged for :30 (illegal procedure while other team had posession).

[laxfan25]

Had this situation the other night in a college game.
Team A had a man in the box waiting to sub on. He delayed his entry until the clear was heading up field - the guy popped out of the box and took the clearing pass. The lead official (who had been trail) had noticed this, and as soon as the guy took the pass he whistled and sent it the other way. Later, he said if he hadn't have caught the clearing pass he wouldn't have whistled it - just let it play on.

[shrekjr]

I guess Sonny's question is at what point does it become a personal foul? Good question!

[laxfan25]

It is a good question, and as Sonny stated, you have two possible calls for the eaxct same infraction. My feeling (at least in the game which I was at) is that oaftentimes the leaning is towards the lesser penalty, at least on the first occurrence. You could also counsel the coach that this is not going to be tolerated a second time, under penalty of law (or USC).

[shrekjr]

I guess an argument could be made that most substitution infractions would be technical fouls unless the player who delayed his entrance becomes immediately involved in the play. Just a thought.

[Anderson]

As others have said before if there is no advantage I would see no reason why it should be called. Now in most situations (where Team A "hides" a man in the box to get a fast break or easy clear) a change of possession call would certainly discourage that team from continuing to keep a man in the box because it is the same as a failed clear (which drives me crazy to watch/coach). But if it were to continue in a game (after it has happened at least twice and the coach has been warned) I would think that then you could start calling the unsportsmanlike. Again this relys a lot of discretion of the refs calling the game. It would be hard for me to call an unsportsmanlike until it began to interfere with the flow of the game.

[LaxRef]

As others have said before if there is no advantage I would see no reason why it should be called. Now in most situations (where Team A "hides" a man in the box to get a fast break or easy clear) a change of possession call would certainly discourage that team from continuing to keep a man in the box because it is the same as a failed clear (which drives me crazy to watch/coach). But if it were to continue in a game (after it has happened at least twice and the coach has been warned) I would think that then you could start calling the unsportsmanlike. Again this relys a lot of discretion of the refs calling the game. It would be hard for me to call an unsportsmanlike until it began to interfere with the flow of the game.

Except under NFHS rules, where deliberately failing to comply with the rules for entering the field of play is a (releasable) USC, not an IP. You can have a sub infraction which is an IP, but if it is a deliberate delay it is a USC under federation rules.

[Sonny]

I guess an argument could be made that most substitution infractions would be technical fouls unless the player who delayed his entrance becomes immediately involved in the play. Just a thought.

Yeah, but the clearing team is gaining a pretty big advantage, regardless or not if said player becomes immediately involved in the play IMHO. The riding team is trying to match up, player for player, and they cannot account for all opponents on the field. They are intentionally creating confusion.

[shrekjr]

I agree. You almost have to try and read intent.

[laxfan25]

I guess an argument could be made that most substitution infractions would be technical fouls unless the player who delayed his entrance becomes immediately involved in the play. Just a thought.

Yeah, but the clearing team is gaining a pretty big advantage, regardless or not if said player becomes immediately involved in the play IMHO. The riding team is trying to match up, player for player, and they cannot account for all opponents on the field. They are intentionally creating confusion.

If you feel they are doing it intentionally, the technical call is very good, since it's just a change of possession. They won't like it, but they'll clean up their act quickly.

[Sonny]

If you feel they are doing it intentionally, the technical call is very good, since it's just a change of possession. They won't like it, but they'll clean up their act quickly.

And that's exactly what I called last night. The assistant coaches weren't happy, but the head coach didn't say one word about it. IMHO, that HC knew exactly what he was doing.

[laxfan25]

If you feel they are doing it intentionally, the technical call is very good, since it's just a change of possession. They won't like it, but they'll clean up their act quickly.

And that's exactly what I called last night. The assistant coaches weren't happy, but the head coach didn't say one word about it. IMHO, that HC knew exactly what he was doing.

Good call Ref! (Don't you wish you heard THAT more often? )

[Lax_Stats]

This will certainly be a call that will be up to referee judgement. However, I would make the call this way: First of all, let's make sure the new trail official and the transition of trail to lead are doing their jobs correctly and watching the box for this violation. If the trail to lead transition official starts to cheat back as soon as the ball hits the ground or on a change of possession, then he has time to back pedal before turning his back on play and the box to run up field beating the ball to the goal line. This gives the new trail official time to clear up things in the defensive end before having to take over responsibility for watching the box for bad substitutions. If the new trail official camps at the cone like he should, keeping the entire sub box in front of him, I find the coach and players quickly realize their substitutions must be clean as they know they are being watched very carefully! I even hear their talk to that effect during the game. Now that I am don't with the mechanics, I'll get back on point. LOL

If you observe the substitution being delayed, you have a "silent play-on" if the ball is loose or the opposing team has the ball. If in your judgement the delayed substitution was unintentional and caused the offending team to gain an advantage or the offended team to be disadvantaged, blow your whistle and award the ball.

Now, if you feel the delayed substitution was intentional, such as the delayed substitution was more of an attempt to deceive and confuse the opposing team by hiding the 10th man in the box ie playing with only 9 men on the field and then slipping the 10th man in suddenly to have a wide open man suddenly on the field on a clear, then I would rule this as USC and make that call.

Ultimately it will boil down to the particular official in position to make the call and their understanding & interpretation of the rules as well as their judgement of what took place.