Debate

BktBallRef

Originally posted by oc
]-I think you are wrong here. Once the foot in the backcourt is picked up the player/ball has frontcourt status. The player then can not put the foot back down in the backcourt. Even if the player is dribbling at the time.

No, he's correct. The dribbler is not in the FC until both feet and the ball are in the FC.

oc

Originally posted by Mike Burns

Originally posted by oc

Originally posted by Camron Rust
[
A2, being a dribbler, remains in the backcourt until all three points (the ball and both feet) touch in the FC with no intervening backcourt touches. So, if A2 was dribbling the ball in the backcourt, and then moved the backcourt foot to the frontcourt, he could still keep dribbling the ball in the backcourt and could even return entirely to the backcourt. He could also put one foot in the backcourt, then move the dribble to the frontcourt...legally.

Technically, a player could, during a dribble in the backcourt, legally continue to dribble and hop on one foot all the way to the frontcourt baseline and back into the backcourt. (as long as 10 seconds didn't expire).

[Edited by Camron Rust on Nov 3rd, 2003 at 05:40 PM]

-I think you are wrong here. Once the foot in the backcourt is picked up the player/ball has frontcourt status. The player then can not put the foot back down in the backcourt. Even if the player is dribbling at the time.

Please cite rule or case book to back up your reply. 🙂
[/B]

I don't have new books but I thank you for forcing me to find my old ones. If you check rule 4-4-6 I think it says pretty clearly that I am...

wrong. DOH!

caref

both feet and the ball must be over. The ball can still be in the backcourt and you have backcourt status even if both feet are in the frontcourt. Has been the rule for several years now. The key is you must be dribbling in the backcourt. Once the ball is picked up and both feet are in the frontcourt you are then in the front court.

I am studying the manuel and casebook tonight. Rule book is in the car and it is too cold to go out and get it. No direct reference in the casebook this year.

canuckrefguy

NCAA Rules, 2003/04
Section 28, Article 3

(c) During a dribble from back court to front court, the ball shall be in the front court when both feet of the dribbler and the ball touch the playing court entirely in the front court.

(Keeping in mind that NFHS rule is, I believe, almost identical)

Dribbling the ball while straddling the midcourt line is different than holding the ball while straddling the midcourt line. In the latter, once you lift your back court foot, you have front court status. NOT SO when you are dribbling.

rainmaker

Originally posted by Camron Rust
Technically, a player could, during a dribble in the backcourt, legally continue to dribble and hop on one foot all the way to the frontcourt baseline and back into the backcourt. (as long as 10 seconds didn't expire).

Legal or not, I'd like to see it!! And I'd like to see you explain that the player at the endline has now violated the 10-second count. That would be worth paying a lot of money for!

Nevadaref

Originally posted by Camron Rust
Technically, a player could, during a dribble in the backcourt, legally continue to dribble and hop on one foot all the way to the frontcourt baseline and back into the backcourt. (as long as 10 seconds didn't expire).

This is the funniest senario I have ever heard! 🙂

Originally posted by Camron Rust
Legal. Normal landing allow. If A5 caught the ball and stood there like a stork for 10 seconds then put the second foot down, it would be a violation.)

Just to clarify, this is a backcourt violation because the player did not make a normal landing, so the exception does not apply. It is not a 10 second violation.

ChuckElias

Originally posted by oc
If you check rule 4-4-6 I think it says pretty clearly that I am...

wrong. DOH!

Don't you hate that feeling? But now you own that rule! Good job. 🙂

ChuckElias

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Originally posted by Camron Rust
Technically, a player could, during a dribble in the backcourt, legally continue to dribble and hop on one foot all the way to the frontcourt baseline and back into the backcourt. (as long as 10 seconds didn't expire).

This is the funniest senario I have ever heard! 🙂

Agreed. I'd love to see somebody try it. Hawks Coach, you gonna test it out?

Originally posted by Camron Rust
Legal. Normal landing allow. If A5 caught the ball and stood there like a stork for 10 seconds then put the second foot down, it would be a violation.)

Just to clarify, this is a backcourt violation because the player did not make a normal landing, so the exception does not apply. [/B][/QUOTE]
Disagree. The whole point of the rule is to allow an airborne player to land, even if the feet land frontcourt, then backcourt. You let both feet touch, regardless of where they touch the court or in what order (as long as they're both inbounds, obviously). This is exactly why the exception was put in.

Mike Burns

Originally posted by caref
both feet and the ball must be over. The ball can still be in the backcourt and you have backcourt status even if both feet are in the frontcourt. Has been the rule for several years now. The key is you must be dribbling in the backcourt. Once the ball is picked up and both feet are in the frontcourt you are then in the front court.

I am studying the manuel and casebook tonight. Rule book is in the car and it is too cold to go out and get it. No direct reference in the casebook this year.

Yep! You got it caref! As you said, both feet and the ball must be over. Sometimes it is just better to find it for yourself than to have it told to you. "Give a man a fish..."

Good job OC on finding the rule in the book. 😀

Nevadaref

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Disagree. The whole point of the rule is to allow an airborne player to land, even if the feet land frontcourt, then backcourt. You let both feet touch, regardless of where they touch the court or in what order (as long as they're both inbounds, obviously). This is exactly why the exception was put in.

Chuck,
Camron and I are both saying that if the player makes a NORMAL landing, then it is not a backcourt violation no matter where or what order the feet come down. However, I certainly don't consider landing on one foot and standing there for a few seconds, then putting the other foot down to be a NORMAL landing. Since the exception says that the player is allowed to make a normal landing, I feel that it does not apply if the player makes an unnatural landing and that a backcourt violation should be called.
Hope I made my position on this clear. Do you still disagree?