The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 02:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
I don't recall your play. Principles the same.
I'll pull out the old case books when I get home to see if I can find it.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 02:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 25
B sent it to b/c A1 in b/c gives b/c status on his/her touch.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 04:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,133
[QUOTE=Rob1968;995339]The ball maintains frontcourt status while in the air, and so, when the team A player, standing in backcourt is first to touch the ball, that player becomes the last to touch the ball while it has frontcourt status, and in the same instant, he/she is the first to touch the ball when it obtains backcourt status.
/QUOTE]
That is not correct.

The rule requires that A be the last to touch the ball BEFORE it returns to the backcourt. "Before" is a very clear word. Touching it in the backcourt is not touching it before touching it in the backcourt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob1968 View Post
The difficulty in the logic is that the same instant of touching constitutes both a frontcourt and a backcourt status. Thus, that logic is seen as cumbersome, faulty, and difficult to explain to observers, especially coaches.
And simply wrong.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 04:46pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
If the violation was for causing the ball to have BC status, this would be a violation.

That's not what the rule is, though.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 05:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spence View Post
I'll pull out the old case books when I get home to see if I can find it.
You won't find it in any Case Book. It was an online interp issued in the 2007-08 season. I agree with Camron and others here that the author of this interp didn't understand the text of the actual rule and issued an incorrect ruling.

From the 2007-08 NFHS Basketball Interpretations:

SITUATION 10: A1, in the team's frontcourt, passes to A2, also in the team's frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team A's backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team A's frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team A's backcourt, but never having touched in Team A's backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team A's backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1; 4-4-3; 9-9-1)
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 05:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,842
[QUOTE=Camron Rust;995356]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob1968 View Post
The ball maintains frontcourt status while in the air, and so, when the team A player, standing in backcourt is first to touch the ball, that player becomes the last to touch the ball while it has frontcourt status, and in the same instant, he/she is the first to touch the ball when it obtains backcourt status.
/QUOTE]

The rule requires that A be the last to touch the ball BEFORE it returns to the backcourt. "Before" is a very clear word. Touching it in the backcourt is not touching it before touching it in the backcourt.
Yep, I tell people that something which occurs simultaneously with something else certainly didn't happen before it. That usually ends the discussion.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 07:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
You won't find it in any Case Book. It was an online interp issued in the 2007-08 season. I agree with Camron and others here that the author of this interp didn't understand the text of the actual rule and issued an incorrect ruling.

From the 2007-08 NFHS Basketball Interpretations:

SITUATION 10: A1, in the team's frontcourt, passes to A2, also in the team's frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team A's backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team A's frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team A's backcourt, but never having touched in Team A's backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team A's backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1; 4-4-3; 9-9-1)
Thanks. That's the one.

Has that been rescinded?
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 07:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spence View Post
Thanks. That's the one.

Has that been rescinded?
Not officially. It should have been. But the consensus is that it is not consistent with the rules and can not be correct by any reading of the rules.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 20, 2016, 10:34pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spence View Post
Thanks. That's the one.

Has that been rescinded?
It disappeared without comment, never to be repeated again. Honestly, many of us ignored it in 07-08 since it was completely counter to the rules without any justification.

The logic of that ruling leads to all sorts of crazy rulings.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 25, 2016, 10:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 3
I had this debate in another forum. This type of play was taken to Peter Webb and Ms. Wynns, NFHS Editor who said ( IT IS A VIOLATION) since a changed the status of the ball to bc, of course ignoring the rule that says touching a player is the same as touching the floor.
I don't like it, but as per nfhs it is a backcourt violation.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 26, 2016, 12:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ref25 View Post
I had this debate in another forum. This type of play was taken to Peter Webb and Ms. Wynns, NFHS Editor who said ( IT IS A VIOLATION) since a changed the status of the ball to bc, of course ignoring the rule that says touching a player is the same as touching the floor.
I don't like it, but as per nfhs it is a backcourt violation.
Sad that neither of those people understand the rule.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 26, 2016, 02:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ref25 View Post
I had this debate in another forum. This type of play was taken to Peter Webb and Ms. Wynns, NFHS Editor who said ( IT IS A VIOLATION) since a changed the status of the ball to bc, of course ignoring the rule that says touching a player is the same as touching the floor.
I don't like it, but as per nfhs it is a backcourt violation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
Sad that neither of those people understand the rule.
Seriously. That ruling was never correct and the rationale behind their ruling is also wrong.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 26, 2016, 10:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ref25 View Post
I had this debate in another forum. This type of play was taken to Peter Webb and Ms. Wynns, NFHS Editor who said ( IT IS A VIOLATION) since a changed the status of the ball to bc, of course ignoring the rule that says touching a player is the same as touching the floor.
I don't like it, but as per nfhs it is a backcourt violation.
I believe Peter Webb is retiring after this season. Let's wait and bring up this issue with the 'new' rules interpreter for IAABO.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 26, 2016, 02:22pm
Show up, keep up, shut up
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ref25 View Post
I had this debate in another forum. This type of play was taken to Peter Webb and Ms. Wynns, NFHS Editor who said ( IT IS A VIOLATION) since a changed the status of the ball to bc, of course ignoring the rule that says touching a player is the same as touching the floor.
I don't like it, but as per nfhs it is a backcourt violation.
Source? Reference? Gonna need some proof on this one.

Don't know about Peter Webb but going to Mrs. Wynns for clarification on a rule is laughable. She is a suit that oversees the rules, that's it. The NFHS needs to hire some legit technical writers to clean up their BS.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 26, 2016, 02:29pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 20,916
IAABO, Not NFHS ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed View Post
Source? Reference? Gonna need some proof on this one.
https://forum.officiating.com/basket...tml#post993575
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

I was in prison and you came to visit me. (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would this be a backcourt violation? bas2456 Basketball 5 Mon Mar 02, 2009 09:28am
Backcourt Violation? rwest Basketball 6 Tue Dec 12, 2006 06:41pm
Backcourt Violation??? electronics_project Basketball 4 Tue Dec 09, 2003 09:57am
Backcourt violation? mrt1963 Basketball 7 Mon Dec 08, 2003 04:53pm
Backcourt Violation? Cornellref Basketball 4 Wed Dec 03, 2003 08:26am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1