rbruno Team A has a throw in at the division line. Player A-1 throws the ball and it is tipped by Player A-2 in the front court. The ball goes into the backcourt where it is first touched by Team A. Is this a backcourt violation? NHSF rules were changed a few years back to have "Team Control" during a throw in which you think would make this a backcourt violation by definition. I thought there was and exception to cover this scenario but can't find it in the rule book. Can someone direct me to the right place for this ruling?
just another ref Team control on the throw-in is for the purpose of fouls. (no free throws on a foul by the throw-in team) The OP is not a violation because player control was not established in the frontcourt. 9-9-1
Adam just another ref wroteTeam control on the throw-in is for the purpose of fouls. (no free throws on a foul by the throw-in team) The OP is not a violation because player control was not established in the frontcourt. 9-9-1 PC in the FC is no longer a requirement listed in the rule. The exception is still there, but it is not written into the rule.
just another ref Adam wrotePC in the FC is no longer a requirement listed in the rule. The exception is still there, but it is not written into the rule. oops, last years book
Nevadaref rbruno wroteTeam A has a throw in at the division line. Player A-1 throws the ball and it is tipped by Player A-2 in the front court. The ball goes into the backcourt where it is first touched by Team A. Is this a backcourt violation? NHSF rules were changed a few years back to have "Team Control" during a throw in which you think would make this a backcourt violation by definition. I thought there was and exception to cover this scenario but can't find it in the rule book. Can someone direct me to the right place for this ruling? 2011-12 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations SITUATION 5: A1 has the ball for an end-line throw-in in his/her frontcourt. A1’s pass to A2, who is in the frontcourt standing near the division line, is high and deflects off A2’s hand and goes into Team A’s backcourt. A2 is then the first to control the ball in Team A’s backcourt. RULING: Legal. There is no backcourt violation since player and team control had not yet been established in Team A’s frontcourt before the ball went into Team A’s backcourt. The throw-in ends when A2 legally touches the ball, but the backcourt count does not start until A2 gains control in his/her backcourt. (4-12-2d; 9-9)
Camron Rust just another ref wroteSo how do we explain the OP now? Regardless of what is actually in the rule, the NFHS has told us.... Regarding fouls, there is TC on a throwin. Anything else, there is no TC on a throwin.
just another ref Camron Rust wroteRegardless of what is actually in the rule, the NFHS has told us.... Regarding fouls, there is TC on a throwin. Anything else, there is no TC on a throwin. So the answer is: The wording still needs some work.
Adam just another ref wroteSo the answer is: The wording still needs some work. Yep. Don't hold your breath.
j51969 rbruno wroteTeam A has a throw in at the division line. Player A-1 throws the ball and it is tipped by Player A-2 in the front court. The ball goes into the backcourt where it is first touched by Team A. Is this a backcourt violation? NHSF rules were changed a few years back to have "Team Control" during a throw in which you think would make this a backcourt violation by definition. I thought there was and exception to cover this scenario but can't find it in the rule book. Can someone direct me to the right place for this ruling? 9-9-3; 9-9-1 SIT D. Team A is awarded a throw-in near the division line. A1's throw-in is deflected by B1; A2 jumps from Team A's frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. The throw-in ends when it is legally touched by B1. A2 gains player and team control in the air after having left the floor from Team A's frontcourt, therefore having frontcourt status. As soon as A2 lands in backcourt, he/she has committed a backcourt violation. The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball (9-9-3)
bob jenkins j51969 wrote9-9-3; 9-9-1 SIT D. Team A is awarded a throw-in near the division line. A1's throw-in is deflected by B1; A2 jumps from Team A's frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. The throw-in ends when it is legally touched by B1. A2 gains player and team control in the air after having left the floor from Team A's frontcourt, therefore having frontcourt status. As soon as A2 lands in backcourt, he/she has committed a backcourt violation. The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball (9-9-3) That's significantly different form the OP
BillyMac just another ref wroteThe wording still needs some work. Adam wroteDon't hold your breath. Stupid NFHS monkeys.
Rich1 j51969 wrote9-9-3; 9-9-1 SIT D. Team A is awarded a throw-in near the division line. A1's throw-in is deflected by B1; A2 jumps from Team A's frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. The throw-in ends when it is legally touched by B1. A2 gains player and team control in the air after having left the floor from Team A's frontcourt, therefore having frontcourt status. As soon as A2 lands in backcourt, he/she has committed a backcourt violation. The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball (9-9-3)n The difference here is the fact that A2 was airborn having lsst touched the floor in the FC, giving him FC status. If A2 tipped the ball and then ran into the back court to get it, this would not be a violation.
bob jenkins Rich1 wroten The difference here is the fact that A2 was airborn having lsst touched the floor in the FC, giving him FC status. If A2 tipped the ball and then ran into the back court to get it, this would not be a violation. ANd that A1 had already touched the ball so the "throw-in exception" no longer applies.