Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
This fits the rule based on the language. I see nothing that contradicts this play in the NF Rule.
|
I'm not sure what you mean by "contradicts", but this (video) has been a high school backcourt violation for as long as I've been officiating, almost four decades, and may still be, even with the new exception.
9-9-1: A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt. EXCEPTION: Any player located in the backcourt may recover a ball deflected from the frontcourt by the defense.
"Deflected from the frontcourt by the defense" is not the same as deflected
in the frontcourt by the defense (as shown on the embedded video).
"From" means that the ball is going somewhere other than the frontcourt, maybe from the frontcourt into the backcourt, or maybe from the frontcourt to out of bounds. "From" is a poor word choice for the ball going from the frontcourt to the frontcourt (as shown in the embedded video).
This (below) is the language that the NFHS needs to include to make it a full switch to the NCAA rule:
"... may be recovered by either team even if the offense was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt."
Right now the language isn't there. Maybe it will be in a few weeks, but it isn't there right now.
As of right now, this is what we've got: The four elements for having a backcourt violation are: there must be team control (and initial player control when coming from a throw-in); the ball must have achieved frontcourt status; the team in team control must be the last to touch the ball before it goes into the backcourt; that same team must be the first to touch after the ball has been in the backcourt. And, of course, we know that the stupid interpretation is gone, hopefully for good.