Straddling the division line

[PP]

B1 deflects the ball away from A1 who is dribbling in the frontcourt. The ball is rolling towards the backcourt and is picked up by A2 who is straddling the division line.
Whats the call?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by PP

B1 deflects the ball away from A1 who is dribbling in the frontcourt. The ball is rolling towards the backcourt and is picked up by A2 who is straddling the division line.
Whats the call?

Team A maintains team control of the ball when the ball was knocked away from A1 by B1. The ball also maintains front court status until it touches the backcourt. A2 is in the backcourt because he has one foot touching in the backcourt.

If the Ball still has front court status then A2 has committed a backcourt violation when he touches the Ball; A2 simultaneously is the last person to touch the ball in his team's front court and the first to touch the ball after causing the ball to go to his team's backcourt.

If the Ball has acquired backcourt status before A2 touches the ball then there is no violation when A2 touches the ball.

MTD, Sr.

[Kelvin green]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Team A maintains team control of the ball when the ball was knocked away from A1 by B1. The ball also maintains front court status until it touches the backcourt. A2 is in the backcourt because he has one foot touching in the backcourt.

If the Ball still has front court status then A2 has committed a backcourt violation when he touches the Ball; A2 simultaneously is the last person to touch the ball in his team's front court and the first to touch the ball after causing the ball to go to his team's backcourt.

If the Ball has acquired backcourt status before A2 touches the ball then there is no violation when A2 touches the ball.

MTD, Sr.

Am I missing something here? A2 can’t be simultaneously in both FC and BC. If A2 is straddling the line. a2 is in the backcourt. B1 was last to touch in FC.... this is no different than B1 knocking ball from FC to backcourt and A2 running it down...?

[Nevadaref]

I agree with Kelvin and so does the text of the NFHS rule, but the NFHS interpretations agree with MTD.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I agree with Kelvin and so does the text of the NFHS rule, but the NFHS interpretations agree with MTD.

That’s the rub.

The interp that has vexed us all for several years was recently reinforced, no?

I don’t like the interp. However, I acknowledge its authority and would strive to apply it if such a play confronted me. I’m just not certain I’ll recognize it quickly enough when 99% of my brain cells will be saying, “ok, defense touched it last, so they can recover anywhere.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BryanV21]

My immediate response was "no violation" because I too think "B deflected the ball into the backcourt, so I'm giving the 'tip' signal." But a little something in my brain said "wait" because of that interpretation. It makes no sense to me that if A2 first let the ball touch the backcourt then there wouldn't be a backcourt violation.

[Bcopas]

If A was straddling the sideline, A caused the ball to go out of bounds. Same applies here. Hopefully makes it easier to understand. Backcourt violation on A.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by Bcopas

If A was straddling the sideline, A caused the ball to go out of bounds. Same applies here. Hopefully makes it easier to understand. Backcourt violation on A.

Im going to disagree with your way of looking at this. At no point can a player straddle an out of bounds line and their team keep possession. The same cannot be said for the division line. You can't simplify it that much without a lot of confusion.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Bcopas

If A was straddling the sideline, A caused the ball to go out of bounds. Same applies here. Hopefully makes it easier to understand. Backcourt violation on A.

It's not a violation to "cause the ball to go to the backcourt" like it's a violation to "cause the ball to go out of bounds"

[just another ref]

This is not a violation. A was not last to touch in the frontcourt.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is not a violation. A was not last to touch in the frontcourt.

More accurately...

A was not the last to touch the ball before the ball returned to the backcourt.

The location of the touch is not important but the timing of the touch relative to the time the ball goes from frontcourt to backcourt is what is important.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by Bcopas

If A was straddling the sideline, A caused the ball to go out of bounds. Same applies here. Hopefully makes it easier to understand. Backcourt violation on A.

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Im going to disagree with your way of looking at this. At no point can a player straddle an out of bounds line and their team keep possession. The same cannot be said for the division line. You can't simplify it that much without a lot of confusion.

I actually like this analogy (even though I don't like the interpretation). If B1 touches the ball and A1 is straddling the sideline, A1 can either touch the ball before it hits the sideline (out of bounds on A1) or they can let it go past the sideline first (out of bounds on B1) and retain possession. Similar logic with the backcourt, even though it's not entirely the same. It does help with the split second decision in the moment.

[JRutledge]

I am not understanding the confusion here. When you straddle the division line, by rule you are located in the BC. If you touch a ball that has yet to reach BC status, then you have violated the backcourt rule. If the all touched the BC and then you touch the ball while straddling the line, then you are still in the BC and the ball had maintained BC status. The OP never said what happened to the ball clearly after the deflection.

So if the ball had FC status and then touched by a player located in the BC, the violation is because the player caused the ball to be in the BC.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

More accurately...

A was not the last to touch the ball before the ball returned to the backcourt.

The location of the touch is not important but the timing of the touch relative to the time the ball goes from frontcourt to backcourt is what is important.

your last sentence is causing me to have a headache... I understand the rule but not that sentence...
I don't like the simultaneous interp because the rule clearly says team has to be last AND first. that means one after the other to me. two touches....

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not understanding the confusion here. When you straddle the division line, by rule you are located in the BC. If you touch a ball that has yet to reach BC status, then you have violated the backcourt rule. If the all touched the BC and then you touch the ball while straddling the line, then you are still in the BC and the ball had maintained BC status. The OP never said what happened to the ball clearly after the deflection.

So if the ball had FC status and then touched by a player located in the BC, the violation is because the player caused the ball to be in the BC.

Peace

A1 is standing in his backcourt near the division line while holding the ball. B1 is guarding A1 while standing on the other side of the division line (in Team A's frontcourt). A1 attempts to throw a forward pass to A2. B1 jumps into the air and blocks the ball. The batted ball returns to A1 in flight (without contacting the court) who catches. What is your ruling?