Thread: NFHS Update
View Single Post
  #75 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 17, 2018, 10:43am
HokiePaul HokiePaul is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
How is this subjective? The defender touched the ball or was have ruled to have touched or deflected as the rule says the ball. If the defender never touched the ball, then you just ruled that the defender never touched the ball. But if the defender deflects the ball, then the offense (or defense how the rule reads), anyone can go get the ball in the backcourt. And in this NF change, it says if the defense deflects the ball, then all bets are off as to who can go get the ball. The language is almost the same.

In the "old" NF interpretation, it was only one type of play and that was when the ball was touched and a player was airborne jumping from the FC and contacted the ball and landed in the BC. That is not what the NF is saying at all based on their current language they are using.

I am not seeing some drastic difference.

Peace
I agree it's not a drastic difference. Officials make judgement calls all the time and this isn't any different. I just happened to like the simplicity of the last to touch in FC, first to touch in BC interpretation.

The subjective part is did the offensive player get the deflected ball in the BC or did they get the deflected ball in the FC and then go into the BC.

With the example noted, the ball is deflected, the offensive player in the front court bats the ball in an attempt to gain control, the ball goes into the BC and the offensive player recovers. Whether or not the batting of the ball in the FC (after the deflection) is considered control (i.e. a dribble) or not is subjective.
Reply With Quote