Another backcourt question

[pfan1981]

I was told once. Would you grant a timeout to that team? If so, then they controlled it in the front court.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by pfan1981

I was told once. Would you grant a timeout to that team? If so, then they controlled it in the front court.

This doesn't make any sense. Player control is required to grant a timeout.

[pfan1981]

I am referring to what constitutes front court status with regard to a possible backcourt violation. If the player has possession to the point where you would grant a timeout, then you have front court status. If the player bats it to the backcourt, you would not grant a timeout in this situation, no backcourt violation.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by pfan1981

I am referring to what constitutes front court status with regard to a possible backcourt violation. If the player has possession to the point where you would grant a timeout, then you have front court status. If the player bats it to the backcourt, you would not grant a timeout in this situation, no backcourt violation.

Whoa! Does batting a ball mean there was player control? Not for calling a timeout, but for calling a BC violation?

EDIT: As far as I can see in the rule book, batting a ball does not equal player control, so batting the ball into the BC in this situation is not a violation. I'd like to hear it from others, though.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Whoa! Does batting a ball mean there was player control? Not for calling a timeout, but for calling a BC violation?

EDIT: As far as I can see in the rule book, batting a ball does not equal player control, so batting the ball into the BC in this situation is not a violation. I'd like to hear it from others, though.

Of course not -- and that's pfan's point. There was never a time when you would have granted a TO, so there was never PC in the front court, so there's no BC violation.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Of course not -- and that's pfan's point. There was never a time when you would have granted a TO, so there was never PC in the front court, so there's no BC violation.

I was watching football at the time, so I didn't consult the rule book for a while... hence the edit.

I just wondered if the exemption saying the ball could go into the BC due to a tipped ball, meant that the player that tipped the ball had no sort of control of it. A player "batting" a ball leads me to believe that he directed the ball into the backcourt on purpose.

Like on a previously mentioned play, where the difference between a try or tap for goal before the expiration of time, and a tipped ball before the expiration of of time, on a made basket.

Kind of playing devil's advocate.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

... where the difference between a try or tap for goal ....

I believe that a try, and a tap, are treated the same for the purposes of scoring points, fouls in the act, etc. (although it hasn't always been that way).

Batting the ball is usually construed to mean no player control.

Apples and oranges.

[pfan1981]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Of course not -- and that's pfan's point. There was never a time when you would have granted a TO, so there was never PC in the front court, so there's no BC violation.

Yup!

[bob jenkins]

Somewhere there is (or was) a rule to the effect that "batting a ball away from other players is not PC" (or maybe it said "is not part of a dribble").

Apply that to teh "bat into the back court" discussion