Backcourt or not?
 

A1 is at the 28' mark in the frontcourt for a throw in. A2 attempts to catch the throw in and touches the ball while standing in the frontcourt and the ball rolls into the backcourt. A2 goes into the backcourt and is the first to touch the ball.

Looking at NFHS Basketball Rule 9-9-1 and 4-12-2.d, I would consider this to be a backcourt violation as team control was established with the frontcourt throw in and A2 being the first to touch in the frontcourt and again in the first to touch in the backcourt.

Is this backcourt?

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

You must have player control inbounds to have team control following a throw in.

No.

NFHS Never Got This Change Straight ...
 

No it's not a backcourt violation. Team control on a throwin is only for the purpose of calling team control fouls during the throwin, not for calling backcourt, ten seconds, three seconds, etc.

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.

Not backcourt, but any new official wouldn't know that by reading the current rules book.
A few years ago the NFHS changed the defintion of team control in order to eliminate shooting FTs for fouls committed during a throw-in (now extended to the point at which an inbounds player gains control of the ball) and this change messed up the backcourt rule.
During the next couple of years the NFHS attempted to clarify its intent and issued a few statements letting officials know that the team control foul change was not to impact the backcourt violation rule. One of these clarifications issued by the NFHS said that no backcourt violation could occur until an inbounds player gained control of the ball following a throw-in. Anything which happens before that can't be a backcourt violation.

I'll try to find that passage and post it for you.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ourt-rule.html

Here is one previous thread with some information for you from the NFHS.

It is not the passage of which I was thinking though. I believe that one came out a year or two after this one. I'll keep looking.
=================
Found it.
POE #4 on page 70 of the 2014-15 NFHS Basketball Rules Book

4. Team Control Status During Throw-in. Team Control Status Inbounds - Since a 2011-12
rules change, team control exists during a throw-in when the thrower-in has the ball at her/his
disposal. The change was made ONLY to eliminate the penalty of administering free throw(s)
when a teammate of the thrower-in commits a common foul during the throw-in. The change made
the penalty consistent with the penalty for other team control fouls. The penalty now is the
awarding of a throw-in to the opposing team at the spot out-of-bounds nearest to where the foul
occurred.
NOTE: Team control during a throw-in is not intended to be equated to player control status
inbounds which creates team control status inbounds. During the throw-in, 10-seconds, 3-seconds,
frontcourt status, backcourt status, closely guarded, etc., are not factors as there has yet to be
player control/team control status obtained inbounds.

Prophetic ...
 

From October 27, 2011:

Maybe Scrapper1 can give all of us some stock market tips.

Scrapper1 the Magnificent ...
 

From October 27, 2011:

Hey Scrapper1: How long do you think it will take for the NFHS to get their 2015-15 Point of Emphasis regarding a defender crossing the free throw line into the actual rulebook as a real rule?

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.M88...=0&w=300&h=300

I've had an issue with this list of four. I find it to be bit redundant, and I have it down to a list of three:
1. Team control inbounds,
2. Last to be touched in the frontcourt, and
3. First to be touched in the backcourt.

Isn't the fourth criterion, "must have achieved frontcourt status" already covered by #2? How can you have "last to be touched in the frontcourt" without frontcourt status?

The ball needn't be touched in the FC (or the BC for that matter) for a violation to happen. (Think A1 throws the ball off an official in the FC and then A2 retrieves the ball in the BC.)

So, since your #2 (and #3) are wrong, you need to have a "ball reaches FC" criterion.

Good point, but the play you posted is most likely part of a dribble or a travel.

I'm missing your point. :confused:

Unless I've missed it somewhere, I can't find anywhere in the rules where the first free throw is awarded for the 7th, 8th and 9th team fouls. It clearly says to award one throw if the first one is successful, but nothing about actually awarding the first throw.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who has never been able to find the actual rule support for that.

I'm assuming you're saying both A1 and A2 are in the BC in this scenario, yes?

Yes.

I've pointed this out on the forum before. The issue arose when the NFHS made an editorial change to the definition of the bonus FT several years ago.

Nice to see they're in a big hurry to fix it.

I predict that at this point they will concede the OP as a backcourt violation before they fix the rule to match their stated intent with this rule change.

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.

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.

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."

By rule, it is a violation. But by case play, the Rules Committee has instructed us to ignore the rule.