Originally Posted by requintero (Post 987696)

For me the three point analogy is always helpful in determining front court/back status although it really only applies to the dribbler. Clearly to first establish front court status all three points must be in the front court - A1's two feet and the ball. For the ball it must actually touch the floor in the front court (for a dribbler) or be in player control by a player in the front court who has both feet in the front court (receipt of a pass). For a back court violation, a Team A player must be the first to touch "in the back court." A Team A player can only be "in the back court" if any of A1's three points are in the back court.

Some examples:

a. A1 has two feet in the front court, ball bounces in the front court and then is in the air in the back court, A1 then reaches across the center line and taps the ball back into the front court or catches the ball (before it hits the ground in the back court) - No Violation.
b. A1 in the back court passes the ball to A2 at the division line. A2 catches the ball, with one foot in the back court and one in front court. A2 is still in the back court. A2 brings his back court foot to the front court and A2 is now in the front court. A2 swings the same foot back to the back court - Violation. A2 with both feet in the front court dribbles the ball on the division line - Violation.

In any event, always thinking about the three points is something that helps me figure out back court and front court status, especially at the division line.

Please let me know it this way of thinking is going to get me in trouble some time.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by requintero (Post 987696)

For me the three point analogy is always helpful in determining front court/back status although it really only applies to the dribbler. Clearly to first establish front court status all three points must be in the front court - A1's two feet and the ball. For the ball it must actually touch the floor in the front court (for a dribbler) or be in player control by a player in the front court who has both feet in the front court (receipt of a pass). For a back court violation, a Team A player must be the first to touch "in the back court." A Team A player can only be "in the back court" if any of A1's three points are in the back court.

Some examples:

a. A1 has two feet in the front court, ball bounces in the front court and then is in the air in the back court, A1 then reaches across the center line and taps the ball back into the front court or catches the ball (before it hits the ground in the back court) - No Violation.
b. A1 in the back court passes the ball to A2 at the division line. A2 catches the ball, with one foot in the back court and one in front court. A2 is still in the back court. A2 brings his back court foot to the front court and A2 is now in the front court. A2 swings the same foot back to the back court - Violation. A2 with both feet in the front court dribbles the ball on the division line - Violation.

In any event, always thinking about the three points is something that helps me figure out back court and front court status, especially at the division line.

Please let me know it this way of thinking is going to get me in trouble some time.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by requintero (Post 987696)

For me the three point analogy is always helpful in determining front court/back status although it really only applies to the dribbler. Clearly to first establish front court status all three points must be in the front court - A1's two feet and the ball. For the ball it must actually touch the floor in the front court (for a dribbler) or be in player control by a player in the front court who has both feet in the front court (receipt of a pass). For a back court violation, a Team A player must be the first to touch "in the back court." A Team A player can only be "in the back court" if any of A1's three points are in the back court.

...

In any event, always thinking about the three points is something that helps me figure out back court and front court status, especially at the division line.

Please let me know it this way of thinking is going to get me in trouble some time.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by requintero (Post 987767)

Thanks for all the clarifying points. Clearly the three point analogy is not a good idea for thinking about over and back violations - because I now see that it is wrong. Good point about the player at the division line holding the ball with one foot in the back court and one in the front court. As soon as he lifts his backcourt foot he is now in the frontcourt - no need for both feet to actually touch into the front court as for a dribbler.

Thanks again.