The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 07, 2017, 10:48pm
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,266
Interpretations Check

We're still good with this, right? . . . Or not?

SITUATION 6: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the teamís frontcourt (Team Bís backcourt). A1ís throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from his/her backcourt
court and catches the ball in the air. B2 lands with the first foot in the frontcourt and second foot in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team B. The throw-in ends with the deflection (legal touch) by B1. B2 gains possession/control and first lands in Team Bís frontcourt and then steps in Team Bís backcourt. The provision for making a normal landing only applies to the exceptions of a throw-in and a defensive player, and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball. (9-9-1, 9-9-3)
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
www.myvirtualofficialsassociation.com
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 07, 2017, 10:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,763
It is still good.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 07, 2017, 11:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
It is still good.
Sadly, that is correct.

I would prefer that they change it so that frontcourt/backcourt not exist at ll until a player catches the ball inbounds and that an airborne player doesn't have either status until landing.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 03:29am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,441
I have to disagree.
Nowhere have I ever read that the defensive player exception only applies to the first player to touch the ball. I believe that someone with the NFHS is incorrectly applying a provision of the throw-in exception to the defense.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 06:53am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,652
Defensive ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
I have to disagree. Nowhere have I ever read that the defensive player exception only applies to the first player to touch the ball. I believe that someone with the NFHS is incorrectly applying a provision of the throw-in exception to the defense.
Bingo. Agree. The word "defensive" jumped out at me right away. This has got to be an error.
__________________
John 3:16 "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."
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 08:35am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 13,314
Simple fix. There are no restrictions to landing in either the frontcourt or the backcourt for the first player to secure PC subsequent to a throw-in.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 08:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,026
NFHS (and NCAAW) have issued prior interps to the effect that there is no "offense" or "defense" until there's PC inbounds. So, the "defensive player" exception cannot apply here.

And, since the throw-in was touched, the "player who catches a throw-in" exception cannot apply, either.

I would support some sort of rules change, but that's what it would take.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 08:54am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
We're still good with this, right? . . . Or not?

SITUATION 6: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the team’s frontcourt (Team B’s backcourt). A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from his/her backcourt
court and catches the ball in the air. B2 lands with the first foot in the frontcourt and second foot in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team B. The throw-in ends with the deflection (legal touch) by B1. B2 gains possession/control and first lands in Team B’s frontcourt and then steps in Team B’s backcourt. The provision for making a normal landing only applies to the exceptions of a throw-in and a defensive player, and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball. (9-9-1, 9-9-3)
Nevada is right about the initial touch stuff not applying to defensive players. Only throwin does it apply. I think it's likely bad grammar/sentence structure/sloppiness as opposed to a new interpretation etc.
Whomever, imo, is trying to say 1. Normal landing exception stuff applies only to throw in and defense. 2. Only for initial touch on throwin. (The play is a throwin that they are explaining.)

They're thinking about throwin but added statement in last sentence about defense which is not correct. sloppy writing and not thinking it all the way through.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 10:48am
#thereferee99
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 624
Not playing defense?

If B2 is fouled attempting to catch the ball it is a Team Control foul on Team A. Clearly there is an offense and a defense on a Throw In, even if the ball is tipped. Frustrating.
__________________
-- #thereferee99
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 10:54am
#thereferee99
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 624
Interp Sitch #4

SITUATION 4: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the teamís backcourt (Team Bís frontcourt). A1ís throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from his/her frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.

RULING: Backcourt violation on Team B. The throw-in ends with B1ís deflection (legal touch). When B2 gains possession/ control in the air, he/she has frontcourt status. A backcourt violation has occurred when B2 lands in backcourt. (9-9-1, 9-9-3)

In situation #6 that Freddy posted, B2 jumps from his BACKCOURT, which is not included in 9-9-3 as an exception. (H/T Nevada for pointing that out from a similar thread in 2006!)
__________________
-- #thereferee99
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 12:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
I have to disagree.
Nowhere have I ever read that the defensive player exception only applies to the first player to touch the ball. I believe that someone with the NFHS is incorrectly applying a provision of the throw-in exception to the defense.
The defensive player exception is not for this situation. The defensive exception has always applied only after there is team & player control inbounds.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 12:30pm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: DE
Posts: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by camron rust View Post
the defensive player exception is not for this situation. The defensive exception has always applied only after there is team & player control inbounds.
+1
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 12:41pm
Lighten up, Francis.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
I have to disagree.
Nowhere have I ever read that the defensive player exception only applies to the first player to touch the ball. I believe that someone with the NFHS is incorrectly applying a provision of the throw-in exception to the defense.
I disagree with your disagreement. The reason the exception only applies to the first person to touch the ball is that the exception in 9-9-3 specifically applies only DURING a jump ball or throw-in, or while on defense. Since the throw-in ends when it is legally touched inbounds, the second player who makes the catch and lands in the backcourt is not making that play DURING the throw-in. Therefore, no exception.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 01:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
The defensive player exception is not for this situation. The defensive exception has always applied only after there is team & player control inbounds.
He knows that I'm sure. the last sentence in Freddy's play says normal landing provision applies to the throw in and defensive exceptions..."AND is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball."

It reads as if initial touch has something to do with the defensive exception. We all agree it doesn't...but that sentence does read that way....
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 08, 2017, 04:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by referee99 View Post

In situation #6 that Freddy posted, B2 jumps from his BACKCOURT, which is not included in 9-9-3 as an exception. (H/T Nevada for pointing that out from a similar thread in 2006!)
I have to agree with this. Situation 6 is not covered by the exception because the player does not jump from his frontcourt as the text of the rule requires. My problem is now solely with Situation 4.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
The defensive player exception is not for this situation. The defensive exception has always applied only after there is team & player control inbounds.
I don't think that is true. I don't have my old books with me at this time, but I believe that 9-9-3 used to read something such as "a player from a team not in control may..." That was always true of the players on the non-throwing team.
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
Fed 2016 Interpretations Are Out Welpe Baseball 9 Sat Feb 13, 2016 02:22am
Basketball Interpretations ronny mulkey Basketball 34 Sat Oct 15, 2011 06:06am
To check or not to check with your partner DaveASA/FED Volleyball 3 Sat Dec 11, 2004 01:27pm
FED interpretations? Randallump Baseball 4 Wed Jan 03, 2001 09:27am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:12am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1