|
|||
9-9....?
Backcourt violation, or not?
https://youtu.be/1xqD1erJTEk
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Here is the play broken down.
I think this is not a violation. It looks like control is not until the ball is in the backcourt. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
I think she catches it before either foot touches BC. She was in FC. As I said not calling it doesn't bother me because it is that close.
|
|
|||
NOT a violation
I would say this is NOT a violation. I base this on the fact that there was NO control prior to this since we were coming off a jump ball, so we are talking about the establishment of initial control.
__________________
If you ain't first, you're LAST!!! |
|
|||
Quote:
This is a violation. |
|
|||
I'm waiting for the "well it's a backcourt because.." and "didn't she travel first"
__________________
in OS I trust |
|
|||
Quote:
You can't have a backcourt violation without first having control in the front court. There had not been any control established. No violation. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
If you ain't first, you're LAST!!! |
|
|||
I like how Rut can do that. I can't.
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call |
|
|||
Quote:
ART. 1 . . . A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt,... Since there has been no team control established, there can be no violation here. STILL, no violation.
__________________
If you ain't first, you're LAST!!! |
Bookmarks |
|
|