Over and Back

[IUgrad92]

Yes, violation. Player A was last to touch in the front court and first to touch in the back court.

[bballref3966]

There are four criteria that all must be met in order to have a backcourt violation. If you run a search on this forum you'll be able to find them.

Originally Posted by Jumpshooter40

Team A is in possession in A's front court. Team B player tips the ball and it last touches off if team A player and goes into Team A's backcourt where Team A is the first to touch. Is this a violation?

Originally Posted by bballref3966

There are four criteria that all must be met in order to have a backcourt violation. If you run a search on this forum you'll be able to find them.

Since the search function here sucks donkey peter here they are:

1. Team control
2. Ball location in front court
3. Last to touch in the front court
4. First to touch in the back court

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Since the search function here sucks donkey peter here they are:

1. Team control
2. Ball location in front court
3. Last to touch in the front court
4. First to touch in the back court

Almost.

1. Team control
2. Ball location in front court
3. Last to touch before the ball returns to the backcourt
4. First to touch after the ball returns to the backcourt

There is a difference.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

There is a difference.

Elaborate, because I'm having trouble envisioning what the difference would be.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Elaborate, because I'm having trouble envisioning what the difference would be.

A1, trapped in the frontcourt near the division line throws a bounce pass to A2. The ball bounces on the division line (or otherwise in the backcourt). A2, while entirely in the frontcourt, catches the ball.

That is a violation even though no player ever touched the ball in the backcourt. It would remain a violation even if the ball bounced again but in the frontocurt before A2 caught it.


Similarly, A1, in the backcourt near the division line, throws a bounce pass to A2. The ball bounces in the frontcourt. A2, while in the backcourt, catches the ball.

Again, that is a violation even though no player ever touched the ball in the frontcourt.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

A1, trapped in the frontcourt near the division line throws a bounce pass to A2. The ball bounces on the division line (or otherwise in the backcourt). A2, while entirely in the frontcourt, catches the ball.

That is a violation even though no player ever touched the ball in the backcourt. It would remain a violation even if the ball bounced again but in the frontocurt before A2 caught it.


Similarly, A1, in the backcourt near the division line, throws a bounce pass to A2. The ball bounces in the frontcourt. A2, while in the backcourt, catches the ball.

Again, that is a violation even though no player ever touched the ball in the frontcourt.

This is what I always have to explain to people.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[RefBob]

[I]Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
A1, trapped in the frontcourt near the division line throws a bounce pass to A2. The ball bounces on the division line (or otherwise in the backcourt). A2, while entirely in the frontcourt, catches the ball.

That is a violation even though no player ever touched the ball in the backcourt. It would remain a violation even if the ball bounced again but in the frontocurt before A2 caught it.


Similarly, A1, in the backcourt near the division line, throws a bounce pass to A2. The ball bounces in the frontcourt. A2, while in the backcourt, catches the ball.

Again, that is a violation even though no player ever touched the ball in the frontcourt.
This is what I always have to explain to people.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk[/I]




Helpful to think about this in terms of the three point rule (two feet and the ball) for determining front court/back court status. In the first scenario, the ball is in the back court when it hits the division line. So if the ball is first touched by A1 with two feet still in the front court we still have one of the points (the ball) in the back court - and a violation. No different than A1 catching the ball when it is in the front court but tapping one foot down in the back court. Same for the second scenario.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Almost.

1. Team control
2. Ball location in front court
3. Last to touch before the ball returns to the backcourt
4. First to touch after the ball returns to the backcourt

There is a difference.

I think I would remove "returns" from 3 and 4 and say
3. last to touch before the ball goes to BC
4. First to touch after ball goes to BC.

I'm easily confused but the word "returns" implies that the ball started in BC. If I was explaining the OP I would say Team A was in team control in FC. A2 was the last to touch the ball before it went to BC and the first to touch it after it went into the BC.

It's just words but for some reason that "returns" bothered me…thx

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I think I would remove "returns" from 3 and 4 and say
3. last to touch before the ball goes to BC
4. First to touch after ball goes to BC.

I'm easily confused but the word "returns" implies that the ball started in BC. If I was explaining the OP I would say Team A was in team control in FC. A2 was the last to touch the ball before it went to BC and the first to touch it after it went into the BC.

It's just words but for some reason that "returns" bothered me…thx

Yes, that would be better.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Since the search function here sucks donkey peter here they are:

1. Team control
2. Ball location in front court
3. Last to touch in the front court
4. First to touch in the back court

For the OP:

AremRed is correct, but for #1 remember that team control for backcourt violation purposes is different than team control for foul purposes with respect to a throw-in situation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SC Official

For the OP:

AremRed is correct, but for #1 remember that team control for backcourt violation purposes is different than team control for foul purposes with respect to a throw-in situation.

It gives the right result for this play but it isn't an entirely accurate set of criteria and it has nothing to do with how team control is defined.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

Yes, violation. Player A was last to touch in the front court and first to touch in the back court.

Correct result, but the reason is only almost correct...

Player A was last to touch before it returned to the backcourt and the first to touch after it returned to the backcourt.

The difference is that it doesn't matter where A actually touches the ball, just the timing relative to it returning to the backcourt. In this case, it leads to the same result, but that isn't always the case.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Correct result, but the reason is only almost correct...

Player A was last to touch before it returned to the backcourt and the first to touch after it returned to the backcourt.

The difference is that it doesn't matter where A actually touches the ball, just the timing relative to it returning to the backcourt. In this case, it leads to the same result, but that isn't always the case.

I think he is exactly correct. The ball is already in the FC in possession of team A. The play isn't a pass from BC that goes to FC and returns etc. What you say is correct but the facts are different. IU said it clearly and correctly when talking about a ball in FC in possession of a player/team then touched by other team etc. Again, all you say is correct but Your examples aren't the OP.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I think he is exactly correct. The ball is already in the FC in possession of team A. The play isn't a pass from BC that goes to FC and returns etc. What you say is correct but the facts are different. IU said it clearly and correctly when talking about a ball in FC in possession of a player/team then touched by other team etc. Again, all you say is correct but Your examples aren't the OP.

The point is the criteria I list are universal, not limited to a specific case. He might as well said that it is a violation when it is a violation.