Those of us familiar with soccer are aware of the rule that only players on the pitch when the OT period ended may participate in the PK Shootout. That’s why at the recent Euros, England put on two substitutes in the last minutes of the 2nd OT and Italy changed GKs. So they would be eligible for the Shootout.
Notre Dame violated that rule in the ACC tournament by changing GKs for the shootout. On Sunday, I emailed Heather Lyke to ask whether Pitt would file a protest as authorized by Rule 5.8. To her credit, my email was answered on Monday. However, the answer from Associate AD Fumo Kimura was incorrect.
He or she said the substitution was allowed “under NCAA rules.”
It was not. Under Rule 3.8.3, like at every other level of soccer with which I am familiar, for a penalty shootout a GK only may be replaced by a field player who was on the pitch when overtime ended. She may not be replaced by a GK or other player from the bench.
Look, I didn’t expect Pitt to protest the match. Maybe no one on the sideline noticed the change, although the ACC TV crew did and pointed it out (without mentioning the rule I think). Maybe they think it would be unseemly to protest after the match ended. Fine. It is too late to protest now as all protests must be filed within 48 hours of the end of the match.
But, what I did not expect was to be lied to by an Associate AD. If you are going to write me to say the action by ND was “legal under NCAA Rules”, then you damn well better have read the applicable rule. Otherwise, just say that you think a protest would be unseemly since no objection was made by the coaching staff at the time the substitution was made. That actually was my thought.
Notre Dame violated that rule in the ACC tournament by changing GKs for the shootout. On Sunday, I emailed Heather Lyke to ask whether Pitt would file a protest as authorized by Rule 5.8. To her credit, my email was answered on Monday. However, the answer from Associate AD Fumo Kimura was incorrect.
He or she said the substitution was allowed “under NCAA rules.”
It was not. Under Rule 3.8.3, like at every other level of soccer with which I am familiar, for a penalty shootout a GK only may be replaced by a field player who was on the pitch when overtime ended. She may not be replaced by a GK or other player from the bench.
Look, I didn’t expect Pitt to protest the match. Maybe no one on the sideline noticed the change, although the ACC TV crew did and pointed it out (without mentioning the rule I think). Maybe they think it would be unseemly to protest after the match ended. Fine. It is too late to protest now as all protests must be filed within 48 hours of the end of the match.
But, what I did not expect was to be lied to by an Associate AD. If you are going to write me to say the action by ND was “legal under NCAA Rules”, then you damn well better have read the applicable rule. Otherwise, just say that you think a protest would be unseemly since no objection was made by the coaching staff at the time the substitution was made. That actually was my thought.