2015-16 The Most Misunderstood Basketball Rules ...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Geof

The rule for backcourt does not dictate player control inbounds. It says "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."

Per 4-12-2, a team is in control of the ball:
a. When a player of the team is in control.
b. While a live ball is being passed among teammates.
c. During an interrupted dribble.
d. When a player of the team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in.

So we have team control during a throw-in, a pass which is still team control, a tip in the front court by the offense which means the ball has front court location ("A ball which is in flight retains the same location as when it was last in contact with a player or the court."). All the elements of backcourt are present.

On a shot, I can see what you all are saying. There is indeed no team control. No so for a throw-in....

The NFHS has put out correspondence stating TC on a throw-in is only for the purposes of adjudicated fouls during the throw-in. It is not "true" TC.

[Geof]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The NFHS has put out correspondence stating TC on a throw-in is only for the purposes of adjudicated fouls during the throw-in. It is not "true" TC.

If that is the case, then that would be the missing link. Thank you!

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Geof

If that is the case, then that would be the missing link. Thank you!

Yes, that is the case. The rule is an absolute mess, but it is what it is. Until team control has been established on the playing court (a player holding or dribbling a live ball), a BC violation is not possible.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Yes, that is the case. The rule is an absolute mess, but it is what it is. Until team control has been established on the playing court (a player holding or dribbling a live ball), a BC violation is not possible.

Essentially, there are two types of team control without either being clearly defined.

Pseudo Team Control starts when the ball is placed at the disposal of a thrower.

True Team Control starts when a player first obtains player control inbounds.

Both end at the same time....when the ball is released on a try, the other team gains control, etc.

Psuedo Team Control is all that is needed for a team control foul.

True Team Control is needed for any other case.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Geof

If that is the case, then that would be the missing link. Thank you!

4-19-7 is the definition of team control foul. It says in part that it is a team control foul if the throw in team fouls from the start of the throw in until player control is established inbounds. As noted by BNR, it is only there because they dont want the throw in team shooting free throws if it commits a foul prior to the ball being possessed.

This is a completely separate animal from team control inbounds. Once the ball is in control of a player somewhere inbounds team control in the court/inbounds begins. Until that happens backcourt issues/violations do not come in to play.

[JRutledge]

You also need to read Rule 9-9 that says very clearly:

Article 1:
A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the front court, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

You do not have TC in the FC by touching the basketball. You have to first possess the basketball to establish TC in the FC. A throw-in only has TC out of bounds, which is not apart of the rule to have a BC violation.

If you read your own reference in 4-12-2a, that says:

When a player of a team is in control of the ball.

Ending a throw-in does not automatically establish TC or even player control.

Peace

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You also need to read Rule 9-9 that says very clearly:



You do not have TC in the FC by touching the basketball. You have to first possess the basketball to establish TC in the FC. A throw-in only has TC out of bounds, which is not apart of the rule to have a BC violation.

If you read your own reference in 4-12-2a, that says:



Ending a throw-in does not automatically establish TC or even player control.

Peace

Yes you do. Certainly not on a throw in, but it is possible to touch the ball in the FC without controlling it to have FC status.

Case book 9.9.1 C: A1 is dribbling in his/her backcourt and throws a pass to the frontcourt. While standing in A's frontcourt A2 touches the ball and deflects it back to A's backcourt where it touches the floor. A2 recovers in the backcourt.

RULING: Violation. The ball was in control of A1 and Team A, and a player from A was the last to touch the ball in frontcourt and a player of A was the first to touch it after it returned to the back court.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yes you do. Certainly not on a throw in, but it is possible to touch the ball in the FC without controlling it to have FC status.

Case book 9.9.1 C: A1 is dribbling in his/her backcourt and throws a pass to the frontcourt. While standing in A's frontcourt A2 touches the ball and deflects it back to A's backcourt where it touches the floor. A2 recovers in the backcourt.

RULING: Violation. The ball was in control of A1 and Team A, and a player from A was the last to touch the ball in frontcourt and a player of A was the first to touch it after it returned to the back court.

A1 is in backcourt passes ball, deflects off official standing in FC then bounces back to the BC. A2 retrieves ball in BC.

Violation.

Before any BC violation is possible, player/team control must be established inbounds, not in the FC as the rule book states. After that occurs, then BC violations are possible.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yes you do. Certainly not on a throw in, but it is possible to touch the ball in the FC without controlling it to have FC status.

Case book 9.9.1 C: A1 is dribbling in his/her backcourt and throws a pass to the frontcourt. While standing in A's frontcourt A2 touches the ball and deflects it back to A's backcourt where it touches the floor. A2 recovers in the backcourt.

RULING: Violation. The ball was in control of A1 and Team A, and a player from A was the last to touch the ball in frontcourt and a player of A was the first to touch it after it returned to the back court.

Having status and committing a violation are not the same thing.

You just have established control in the FC before you can have a BC violation according to the rule. And you must not be one of the exceptions stated in the rule either.

And that casebook play you mentioned does not go along with the written rule. When all else fails, I am going with the rulebook and what it states.

Peace

[Geof]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Having status and committing a violation are not the same thing.

You just have established control in the FC before you can have a BC violation according to the rule. And you must not be one of the exceptions stated in the rule either.

And that casebook play you mentioned does not go along with the written rule. When all else fails, I am going with the rulebook and what it states.

Peace

Having status and committing a violation are not the same thing, as you state. But determining the status of the ball lends itself to determining whether a violation has been made.

The case OKREF states goes along perfectly with the rules. There is team control. The ball being touched in the front court gives the ball front court status while still in team control. The ball goes into the backcourt after having established frontcourt status and is first touched by a member of the same team. Backcourt violation is the call.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Having status and committing a violation are not the same thing.

You just have established control in the FC before you can have a BC violation according to the rule. And you must not be one of the exceptions stated in the rule either.

And that casebook play you mentioned does not go along with the written rule. When all else fails, I am going with the rulebook and what it states.

Peace

You were originally talking about a throw in and how simply touching the ball in the FC after the throw in does not establish team control. As you said, the ball's status doesnt necessarily mean a violation. The ball is in the FC when it is tipped on the throw in but there is no team control yet. At some point there has to be team control in the FC for there to be a violation. The case play okref cited doesnt deal with a throw in/tip etc. didnt really apply to what you were trying to say.

Having said that, the case play he cited is consistent with the written rule. A1 has the ball in the BC (player and team control). He passes the ball toward A2 in FC. ball is in air---team control still exists. A2 deflects it back. When the ball hits A2 there is still team control and the ball is now in FC. It goes back to A1 and he first to touch it. Violation. 9-1-1. The BC rule only requires team control to have been in FC at some time. Player control IN the FC isnt required. There has to be player control somewhere inbounds before we have team control but it, team control, can start in the BC.

[BillyMac]

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.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Having status and committing a violation are not the same thing.

You just have established control in the FC before you can have a BC violation according to the rule. And you must not be one of the exceptions stated in the rule either.

And that casebook play you mentioned does not go along with the written rule. When all else fails, I am going with the rulebook and what it states.

Peace

The case book is the interpretation of the rules book. I go to the case book when it explicitly says if X happens Y is the result.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Having status and committing a violation are not the same thing.

You just have established control in the FC before you can have a BC violation according to the rule. And you must not be one of the exceptions stated in the rule either.

And that casebook play you mentioned does not go along with the written rule. When all else fails, I am going with the rulebook and what it states.

Peace

Yes it does. Team control continues until the opponent secures control. Control in the BC, followed by a pass to the FC that touches a member of Team A, would establish team control in the FC. The casebook play goes along just fine with the written rule.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Yes it does. Team control continues until the opponent secures control. Control in the BC, followed by a pass to the FC that touches a member of Team A, would establish team control in the FC. The casebook play goes along just fine with the written rule.

There is TC for foul purposes and there is TC for other purposes like a BC violation.

Again, to have a BC violation you have to have TC while in the FC first. You cannot have TC in the FC until you possess the ball as a team.

And if the casebook and the rule goes along just fine, why are people confused with how the rule is written? Because this was never the case before the rule about TC came into play for fouls. And the NF also clearly said that the only reason they change the rule in the first place was for foul purposes, not to change the rule on the BC violation.

Peace