Over and Back

[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 requintero

[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.

3 points only applies to dribbling the ball. Does not apply to passes etc. When the ball hits the division line it is in the BC. If team A is last to touch before the pass and the first to touch after, it doesn't matter where he is standing. # points only applies to a player dribbling the ball.

[RefBob]

Originally Posted by BigCat

3 points only applies to dribbling the ball. Does not apply to passes etc. When the ball hits the division line it is in the BC. If team A is last to touch before the pass and the first to touch after, it doesn't matter where he is standing. # points only applies to a player dribbling the ball.

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.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by requintero

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.

If I have the ball in BC and throw it to FC it has FC status the moment it hits FC or touches a player or referee in FC. Two feet are not required. 3 points is used for the dribbler near half line. Both feet and ball must be in FC when talking about dribbler. I'll explain more later if needed. Gotta go.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by requintero

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.

a. "(the ball) is in the backcourt, should read "the ball is over the backcourt, because the location of the ball is defined by it touching or being touched, see Rule 4-1, 2, 3, 4, specifically 4-4-3.

b. If a player is holding the ball and has one foot in the frontcourt, and the other foot in the backcourt, as soon as he/she lifts the foot from the backcourt, he/she and the ball are in the frontcourt, and if the lifted foot is returned to the backcourt, a violation has occurred, see Case Book 4.4.1 (a)

The "three points idea," referring to both feet and the ball, applies to a dribble from backcourt to frontcourt, see Rule 4-4-1 ART. 6. Other situations regarding frontcourt/backcourt player and/or ball location, are covered by other Rules.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by requintero

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.

Nice, except it is not correct. There are many situations where it just doesn't work. Think of it with the correct principles and you'll be better off.

[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.