Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades of Gray
Freddy,
No, you are a couple of thousand posts short and a couple of thousand miles away from me and TWLA.
Thanks for the replies but I am still having trouble trying to understand why this should be a backcourt violation in the example I described. As I stated earlier, I don't doubt TWLA, Nevada Ref, etc.'s statements that under the rules this is a violation, but I can't see why it should be. For example, if the player did not lift his non-pivot foot but merely dragged it, this would not be a violation, correct? So why should it be a violation for merely picking the foot up and setting it back down? Also if the player is dribbling the ball while staddling the line, the foot in the back court can be picked up and put down, right?
Maybe I should just go with "That's the rule, live with it", but I would like to hear some logical explanation of why the rule is written the way it is. Thanks.
|
The official NFHS rulings contain the explanations.
9.7.2 SITUATION:
A1 is standing with one foot inside and the other outside the
three-second restricted area. A1 lifts the foot from the restricted area and returns
it there without touching it first to the nonrestricted area. RULING: Violation. This
action does not terminate the three-second count. The count goes on since
merely lifting the foot from the restricted space is interpreted as an attempt to
evade the rule and avoid its purpose. However, there is no three-second count
during rebounding action or during a throw-in. The count on a player in the
restricted area is suspended when that player begins a try for goal.
4.4.1 SITUATION:
As Team A is advancing the ball from its backcourt toward
its frontcourt, A1 passes the ball to A2. A2 catches the ball while both feet are on
the floor – with one foot on either side of the division line. In this situation, either
foot may be the pivot foot. (a) A2 lifts the foot which is in the backcourt and then
puts it back on the floor in the backcourt; or (b) A2 lifts the foot which is in the
frontcourt, pivots and puts it on the floor in the backcourt. RULING: In (a), it is a
backcourt violation. When A2, while holding the ball, lifts the foot which was in
the backcourt, the ball is now in the frontcourt. When A2’s foot then touches in
the backcourt, it is a violation. In (b), when A2 lifts the foot which is in the frontcourt
and places it down in the backcourt, the location of the ball has not
changed. The ball is still in the backcourt and no violation has occurred. (4-35-2)
The second one depends heavily on the definitions of ball and player location.