10 Second Backcourt Violation

[JMW]

Pass is made from back court with two seconds to go, is it a back court violation if:
1. Pass is in air at end of ten second count and has not been touched in front court;
2. Pass bounces inbounds in front court before ten second count expires but is not touched in front court until after ten seconds have expired.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JMW

Pass is made from back court with two seconds to go, is it a back court violation if:
1. Pass is in air at end of ten second count and has not been touched in front court;
2. Pass bounces inbounds in front court before ten second count expires but is not touched in front court until after ten seconds have expired.

See ball location rule.4-4-2,3. 1 is a violation. 2. No violation. Ball has achieved FC status when pass hits floor in FC. See also 9-8. 10 second rule.

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by JMW

Pass is made from back court with two seconds to go, is it a back court violation if:
1. Pass is in air at end of ten second count and has not been touched in front court;

Yes, and have fun explaining this to the offending team's coach!

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Yes, and have fun explaining this to the offending team's coach!

What would be difficult about it?

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by johnny d

What would be difficult about it?

Nothing at all with regards to the explanation. Most coaches I've had to explain this to don't get the definition of frontcourt status. They're usually incredulous.

The ones who I don't have to explain it to know the rule

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Most coaches I've had to explain this to don't get the definition of frontcourt status. They're usually incredulous.

Too bad for them. When you give them the curtesy of an explanation, you are engaging in a lecture, not a debate. They can accept your explanation and move on, or they can act incredulous, continue to argue, and then be subject to a rule I am sure all coaches are familiar with.

Originally Posted by johnny d

and then be subject to a rule I am sure all coaches are familiar with.

And then the coach will claim they haven't seen that rule enforced against them in 30 years!

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Too bad for them. When you give them the curtesy of an explanation, you are engaging in a lecture, not a debate. They can accept your explanation and move on, or they can act incredulous, continue to argue, and then be subject to a rule I am sure all coaches are familiar with.

When I give an explanation on a rule, I keep it to one or two sentences, as simple as I possibly can. If they want to act incredulously, they can do so as I'm walking away, having explained my call.

The last time I had to explain a "confusing" rule (a backcourt violation), the coach kept interrupting me. I finally said "Would you like an explanation or not?" He said "No", and that was the end of it. I hope he looked up the rule later.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Nothing at all with regards to the explanation. Most coaches I've had to explain this to don't get the definition of frontcourt status. They're usually incredulous.

The ones who I don't have to explain it to know the rule

One of these days you will realize you will not have to explain anything to a coach and be OK with that fact.

When we get enough experience and realize we have to explain very little, we will be happier as officials. Coaches argue with us about basic rules, so why would we expect them to be understanding about the complicated ones?

Peace