Inbounds pass muffed into backcourt

[Kansas Ref]

[

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

1. This play isn't relevant to this discussion because the OP involves a throw in.

2. Even on the court, until they actually change the rule to match this distorted interpretation, I'm not going to see that play that well.

* 1. The guidance from Kansas management that I posted is entirely relevant to permalink post # 6 made by Hawkeye.

*2. If you are the ref in the proximity of such an event/incident as the one we are discussing, then you may have to work to get a better look at the action.

[dahoopref]

I know you requested a NFHS ruling but here is the Men's NCAA ruling, scenario #3 was similar to the OP's play:

A.R. 215

The ball is at the disposal of Team A for a throw-in. A1 attempts
to throw the inbounds pass to A2, who is located in his frontcourt near the
division line.

3. A1’s throw-in pass is deflected by A2, who fumbles it into the
backcourt. A2 then goes into the backcourt and recovers the fumble.

RULING 3: Legal. This is not a back-court violation since neither player nor
team control had been established in the frontcourt.
(Rule 9-12.4, and 9-12.1 through .3, .5 through .7 and .9 through
.10)

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bossman72

Not an official here, but have a couple questions.

If A1 is dribbling in the front court, but his foot steps on the division line, is that a violation?

If A1 is dribbling in the front court, but the ball touches the division line (half over), is that a violation?

If A1 is dribbling in the front court and the ball goes completely over the division line, but the player stays in the front court, is it a violation?

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

Yes, Yes and Yes.

On 1 and 2 I would have thought so but this question has me thinking. I think we've always called them that way but I'm not so sure that the rules actually support that. Hmmm.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bossman72

If A1 is dribbling in the front court, but the ball touches the division line (half over), is that a violation?

Not a violation until the dribbler touches the ball after it bounces.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

On 1 and 2 I would have thought so but this question has me thinking. I think we've always called them that way but I'm not so sure that the rules actually support that. Hmmm.

My thoughts....

Rule 9, SECTION 9, BACKCOURT ART. 1 . . . A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

According to rule 9, to have a backcourt violation, the ball must return to the backcourt. The other articles in this section talk about throwin or transitioning to the frontcourt, so they're not relevant. So, did the ball return to the backcourt?

Rule 4, SECTION 4 BALL LOCATION, AT DISPOSAL
ART. 1 . . . A ball which is in contact with a player or with the court is in the backcourt if either the ball or the player (either player if the ball is touching more than one) is touching the backcourt.
ART. 2 . . . A ball which is in contact with a player or with the court is in the frontcourt if neither the ball nor the player is touching the backcourt.

The definition of ball location says the ball is in the backcourt only when it touches the backcourt or a player who is touching the backcourt. If the dribbler doesn't touch the ball while on the line, does the ball ever return to the backcourt? By the above rule, it doesn't seem so.

You might be tempted to say yes based on the OOB rule...

SECTION 3 OUT OF BOUNDS
ART. 1 . . . A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.
NOTE: The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary, even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she is out of bounds.

But, I don't know of any rule that says this restriction on a dribbler and a boundary line extends to the division line.

I know I've always called this a violation, but it seems the rules do not consider the ball to have returned to the backcourt just because the dribbler steps on the line unless the dribbler is touching the ball while doing so.

Similarly, for a dribble that touches the line, it seems, unless I'm missing something, that touching the line is nothing. It would be come a backcourt violation as soon as the dribbler touches it again, however.

What am I missing?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by bossman72

Not an official here, but have a couple questions.

If A1 is dribbling in the front court, but his foot steps on the division line, is that a violation?

If A1 is dribbling in the front court, but the ball touches the division line (half over), is that a violation?

If A1 is dribbling in the front court and the ball goes completely over the division line, but the player stays in the front court, is it a violation?

1. If team A had the ball in the FC, say on the wing, and then passed it to A1, he dribbles ball and steps on line. Violation. When he steps on division line, he has BC status. If ball wasnt in FC to start but A1, while dribbling, never got both feet and the ball to touch in the FC then stepping on the line is not a violation. He did not get all 3 parts over and then step on line. He is still in the BC by rule.

2. Same answer.

3. Same answer.

A player dribbling the ball is deemed in control of it. He can call a TO while dribbling. The fact that the player isnt touching or holding the ball at time it hits division line or BC doesnt matter. If its a dribble, its a dribble and he has control. Ball had TC in FC and he in control has it in BC. No other player touch it. Violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BigCat

The fact that the player isn't touching or holding the ball at time it hits division line or BC doesn't matter. If its a dribble, its a dribble and he has control. Ball had TC in FC and he in control has it in BC. No other player touch it. Violation.

Are you confusing this (above) with the play where a dribbler who steps on a boundary is considered to be on that boundary even if the ball isn't in the player's hand? This situation is the opposite: The ball hits the boundary, while the player isn't touching the boundary.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Are you confusing this (above) with the play where a dribbler who steps on a boundary is considered to be on that boundary even if the ball isn't in the player's hand? This situation is the opposite: The ball hits the boundary, while the player isn't touching the boundary.

If a player is dribbling the ball and dribbles it on a side line or end line. He's caused it go out. Here, the division line is same as a boundary. Rule says while dribbling all three must be in FC for player be in control in FC. Once he is in FC, if he is dribbling, he has control. If anything touches BC, while he is dribbling...Violation.


Short answer.. No. Don't think I'm confusing this. Of course, if I'm confused..I might not realize I'm confused...that's a different story.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BigCat

If anything touches BC, while he is dribbling...Violation.

Even a really bad bounce pass?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BigCat

If a player is dribbling the ball and dribbles it on a side line or end line. He's caused it go out. Here, the division line is same as a boundary. Rule says while dribbling all three must be in FC for player be in control in FC. Once he is in FC, if he is dribbling, he has control. If anything touches BC, while he is dribbling...Violation.


Short answer.. No. Don't think I'm confusing this. Of course, if I'm confused..I might not realize I'm confused...that's a different story.

I'm not so sure this is true. It may be that it should be true, but I am not seeing it in the rules. See my post above.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm not so sure this is true. It may be that it should be true, but I am not seeing it in the rules. See my post above.

I saw it. A player dribbling is in control of ball. Takes 3 parts to be in FC. Once in FC, if one of 3 in BC while dribbling, player in BC. Step on line, dribble on line or in BC he cause it go in BC

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

* 1. The guidance from Kansas management that I posted is entirely relevant to permalink post # 6 made by Hawkeye.

*2. If you are the ref in the proximity of such an event/incident as the one we are discussing, then you may have to work to get a better look at the action.

1. There are significant differences. I'd missed that play, but the primary difference is that A2 caught the ball with FC status and carried it into the BC. That's a violation. Had he waited until he landed before catching it, then we have that insipid play.

2. I'm not calling it until they change the rules, period. The logical ramifications of that ruling are absurd, and the rule references are just flat wrong.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I saw it. A player dribbling is in control of ball. Takes 3 parts to be in FC. Once in FC, if one of 3 in BC while dribbling, player in BC. Step on line, dribble on line or in BC he cause it go in BC

3 points is not a general concept. It is a specific application that ceases to be applicable once a player has gained FC status.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Adam

3 points is not a general concept. It is a specific application that ceases to be applicable once a player has gained FC status.

That is the point. A player dribbling in FC is in control. If he bounced ball on division line he's caused it to be in BC. Steps on line.same. It takes 3 to get u to FC but once you there it only takes one to put you in BC. As far as player holding or dribbling ball, the division line is like a boundary.