Backcourt or not?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Yes.

Then I cannot see a violation in the sitch presented:

A1, in the backcourt, passes the ball ahead, and bounces off the T in the frontcourt, where it is touched by A2 in the backcourt.

While the ball had frontcourt status, the rules (9-9-1&2) say that A1 needs to be in the frontcourt (last to touch) for there to be a violation.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Then I cannot see a violation in the sitch presented:

A1, in the backcourt, passes the ball ahead, and bounces off the T in the frontcourt, where it is touched by A2 in the backcourt.

While the ball had frontcourt status, the rules (9-9-1&2) say that A1 needs to be in the frontcourt (last to touch) for there to be a violation.

You need to read part of it again. 9-9-2: While in player and team control in its backcourt, a player shall not cause the ball to go from backcourt to frontcourt and return to backcourt, without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, such that he/she or a teammate is the first to touch in the backcourt.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

You need to read part of it again. 9-9-2: While in player and team control in its backcourt, a player shall not cause the ball to go from backcourt to frontcourt and return to backcourt, without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, such that he/she or a teammate is the first to touch in the backcourt.

There's also a specific case on this.

And, maybe some interp where it's just a bounce pass from one side of the court to another where the ball hits the division line -- BC violation.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by just another ref

You need to read part of it again. 9-9-2: While in player and team control in its backcourt, a player shall not cause the ball to go from backcourt to frontcourt and return to backcourt, without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, such that he/she or a teammate is the first to touch in the backcourt.

Well noted, but it throws a wrench into the whole "last to touch, first to touch" vernacular. While the ball may gain FC status by hitting a T or taking a spinning hop before going to BC, you can debate it never last touched anyone in FC.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Well noted, but it throws a wrench into the whole "last to touch, first to touch" vernacular. While the ball may gain FC status by hitting a T or taking a spinning hop before going to BC, you can debate it never last touched anyone in FC.

And it never has to "last touch anyone in FC" (or in the BC for that matter).

It needs to "last touch anyone before going to the BC" and "first touch anyone after going to BC."