Backcourt or not?

[OfficialBFish]

High school tournament today. Player A1 is dribbling in the backcourt, tries to throw a long, hard pass to a teammate. The pass is so high and overthrown that it hits the backboard, bounces a few times, and comes right back to player A1, still in the backcourt. My partner originally called backcourt violation, but after a discussion, we decided that since it hit the backboard it should just be ruled as a try and that team control was lost and regained legally. After the game, I really started to question this call. I'd think that just because it hits the backboard doesn't make it necessarily a shot attempt. So my questions:
1. If he clearly wasn't shooting, should it really be looked at as a try?
2. Does hitting the backboard give the ball front court status? Would it be backcourt violation?

[SC Official]

1) An official must judge that the player is throwing or attempting to to throw toward the goal for it to be considered a try. In this case, this is not a try for goal, so team control doesn't end. The ball striking the backboard is inconsequential with respect to whether or not you judge this a try.

2) Yes, the ball touching Team A's own backboard gives the ball frontcourt status, see NFHS 4-4-5.

1. Team control (Yes, the errant pass does not cause team control to end)
2. Ball gains frontcourt status (Yes, when the ball hit the backboard)
3. A is the last to touch before the ball returns to the backcourt (Yes, no player from Team B touched the ball before it returned the the backcourt)
4. A is the first to touch after the ball returns to the backcourt (Yes, Team A was the first to touch the ball when it returned to the backcourt)

This is a backcourt violation.

[Camron Rust]

Agree on all counts.....violation. The only way it is not is if you had judged the "throw" to be a "try". And for that to be the case, you have to judge intent, not the result.

[referee99]

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by referee99

If you look at this play the way the opening post states, this is a BC violation. However, in this play, If the defender touched the pass before it hit the backboard, I believe that this is not a violation. The defender would be the last and first to touch because no one else did until the ball regained backcourt status.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

If you look at this play the way the opening post states, this is a BC violation. However, in this play, If the defender touched the pass before it hit the backboard, I believe that this is not a violation. The defender would be the last and first to touch because no one else did until the ball regained backcourt status.

That looks like a try to me, which would have ended team control. But even if you don't rule it a try, Team A (black) was not the last to touch it before it returned to the backcourt (I don't think, can't really tell). Incorrect call either way.

[JRutledge]

Looks to me like a pass. I have a BC violation and I do not see any other Team B (white team) player touch the ball. I think that is a good call.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Looks to me like a pass ... I do not see any other Team B (white team) player touch the ball.

Also looks like pass to me (low trajectory, probably intendeded for Black 32 running down the left side.), but it also looks like defender White 35 deflects the pass. What a crazy play. Good idea for the officials to get together to discuss the play after the initial backcourt call, certainly not an ending where the officials all run off the court. Nice video referee99. Thanks for sharing.

[SAK]

If you deem that this was a pass and not a try for goal then its a backcourt violation.

If you deem this a try for goal then no backcourt violation.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Also looks like pass to me (low trajectory, probably intendeded for Black 32 running down the left side.), but it also looks like defender White 35 deflects the pass. What a crazy play. Good idea for the officials to get together to discuss the play after the initial backcourt call, certainly not an ending where the officials all run off the court. Nice video referee99. Thanks for sharing.

I do not see a tip or deflection, but if there is then that would factor in the ruling. But it looks like a pass to be in nothing else he does a one handed toss, which is not often a shot unless there are only seconds to go. Well there was time as the last toss was in time apparently.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not see a tip or deflection ...

To be honest, neither did I, but I did see the trajectory of the ball change (upward) as the thrown ball went very near the outstretched hands of defender White 35. In any case, the center official would have had great look at this, and would contribute his observation to the post play discussion that took place in the center circle.

I wonder how all of this was finally adjudicated?

[JRutledge]

Maybe, but it just seems like a bad decision to make a long pass considering the fact he was not beating the clock immediately and the length of the throw/toss it was just bad pass attempt. But it appears this was a BC violation called and it does not appear anyone changed that call based on the officials reaction.

Peace

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by SAK

If you deem that this was a pass and not a try for goal then its a backcourt violation.

If you deem this a try for goal then no backcourt violation.

Who is "you" in the situation of having a crew getting together? Does the calling official have to rule it a try/not a try, what if his partner or the chief has it as try? I assume if a partner picked up a deflection that was missed you would use that info but what about the was it a try discussion?

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by OfficialBFish

High school tournament today. Player A1 is dribbling in the backcourt, tries to throw a long, hard pass to a teammate. The pass is so high and overthrown that it hits the backboard, bounces a few times, and comes right back to player A1, still in the backcourt. My partner originally called backcourt violation, but after a discussion, we decided that since it hit the backboard it should just be ruled as a try and that team control was lost and regained legally. After the game, I really started to question this call. I'd think that just because it hits the backboard doesn't make it necessarily a shot attempt. So my questions:
1. If he clearly wasn't shooting, should it really be looked at as a try?
2. Does hitting the backboard give the ball front court status? Would it be backcourt violation?

Lets change it up a bit...
Player A1 is dribbling in the backcourt, tries to throw a long, hard pass to a teammate. The pass is so high and overthrown that it hits the rim, bounces a few times, and comes right back to player A1, still in the backcourt.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by CoachP

Lets change it up a bit...
Player A1 is dribbling in the backcourt, tries to throw a long, hard pass to a teammate. The pass is so high and overthrown that it hits the rim, bounces a few times, and comes right back to player A1, still in the backcourt.

There is nothing in the rules that declares a thrown ball that hits the rim is always a try. Judgment required. If there's room for doubt I will call it a try. But, if its clearly just a bad pass….it is still a pass and no loss of team control. violation.