1.) It is not required (for the backcourt violation)
2.) A player who passes the ball without establishing player control just pulled off a neat trick.

Now I just feel bad for you.

The part your missing is that team control may "continue" while the ball is being passed but it doesn't begin until a player holds or dribbles the ball inbounds. It has to begin by one of those two acts before it becomes a pass....the pass assumes it came from player control.

When I read through all of the responses in this thread, I knew that you would cite this rule. What you fail to grasp is that a pass does not establish team control, it only continues it if it already exists. You are only looking at part of the rule instead of the whole thing.

Team control has three parts: 1. establishment, 2. continuation, 3. termination

Batting or tapping the ball cannot establish team control. Only holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds can do that.

1. Establishment of player & team control inbounds absolutely is required for the backcourt violation!
May I direct you to the POE on page 69 of the NFHS Rules Book from this season for you to read?
"With specific regard to the backcourt violation, a team may not be the last to touch a live ball in the front court and then be the first to touch a live ball in the backcourt, provided that team has established player control/team control on the playing court (either in the backcourt or frontcourt).

There are only two ways to establish player control: holding or dribbling the ball. Passing is not a method to establish player control and that is why you are incorrect about this play.

2. It's purely definitional, but definitely possible. Batting a rebound to a teammate is one example. It also happens during a throw-in pass. There used to be no team control at all during throw-ins, now there is a specific throw-in team control only for fouls, which does not pertain to backcourt violations. Some people refer to this as a false or fake team control.

You beat me to this point while I was crafting my post.
Correct, as usual, Camron. Have a great season!

If it is impossible to establish team control by batting the ball to a teammate after a try, why does the NFHS casebook have to explicitly spell out that no team is in control after a try, nor during the period which follows this act while the ball is slapped AWAY from other players in an attempt to secure the ball? Is it because when the ball is batted to a teammate it is a pass and established team control?

According to Rule 9 Section 9 Art 1, no player control is required for a backcourt violation to occur.

You have front court team control (bats to a teammate), A5 is the last to touch in the front court, A1 is the first to touch in the back court.

B5 goes up for a defensive rebound and bats the ball up and toward a teammate over in the corner of the court. When do you start your :10 backcourt count?
It appears according to your analysis of team control the count starts with the tap meaning the backcourt count could be at 2 or maybe 3 by the time the team mate catches the ball in the corner.

And to have frontcourt team control, there must first have been player control. That is how team control is established.

If team control were established on a bat, we'd have a lot of team control fouls on rebounds as players bat the ball in an attempt to get the rebound. In fact, what if two players bat it? Are both teams in control?

I would hardly say that in your scenario that there is a specific target.

You did not answer my question about the explicit text in the casebook.

Your questions are really not applicable if there is no reason to believe that the player was attempting to pass the ball to a teammate.

Where does it say that you HAVE to establish player control to establish team control? This make a descent argument against that.

The teammate in the corner is not a specific target? Again, when would you start your back court count?

1.) Player and team control is needed to start the count.
2.) If the ball was batted so high that it took 3 seconds to reach the target 25 feet away then I would not say it was specifically intended to target that individual. You can but I won't.

Then how can you say A5's batting a rebound all the way into the back court was specifically intended for A1? By the way, in my situation I'm not starting the back court count until the teammate establishes player/team control when he catches the ball just as in the OP. When A5 bats a rebound all the way into the back court, player/team control did not begin until A1 recovered the ball. No violation, just the start of a back court count.

1. By the time the ball reaches the corner in your hypothetical situation, there would be multiple players there.
2. There has not been enough detail provided about the intentional batting of the ball in the OP. I am saying it is possible to have a backcourt violation. Others are saying it is impossible.
3. Of course you would not start your 10 count until there was player contol in the backcourt in your b5 rebounding situation. That is the rule.