Could I have done anything?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by CJP

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.

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?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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?

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.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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?

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

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by CJP

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

It is a fundamental concept of the rules.

Here, for one:

ART. 5 . . . Team control does not exist during a jump ball or the touching of a rebound, but is reestablished when a player secures control.

Here is another, form the fundamentals at the front and in Rule 4:

While the ball remains live, a loose ball always remains in control of the team whose player last had control, unless it is a try or tap for goal.

That pretty much says that it stays with the prior team until the new team establishes player control. It wouldn't be any different from a situation with no team control.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It is a fundamental concept of the rules.

Here, for one:



Here is another, form the fundamentals at the front and in Rule 4:



That pretty much says that it stays with the prior team until the new team establishes player control. It wouldn't be any different from a situation with no team control.

It is not a fundamental concept that you must have player control before establishing team control. There are 20 fundamental rules. This is not one.

Art 5 does not overrule Art 2. Art 2 says that you have team control during a pass.

You still did not answer my question about the casebook comment.

Edit: I am going to yield that you are correct about player control first then team control. I am sticking to my argument that batting the ball to a teammate (passing) established the player control.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by CJP

It is not a fundamental concept that you must have player control before establishing team control. There are 20 fundamental rules. This is not one.

Art 5 does not overrule Art 2. Art 2 says that you have team control during a pass.

You still did not answer my question about the casebook comment.

4-12-5 explains that 4-12-2 does not apply during rebounding. 4-12-5 is there specifically so people don't do what you are trying to do. It specifies (pretty clearly at that) the circumstances that allow team control to be re-established when it has been ended by rule.

By rule, there is no team control once the ball has become loose on a tap or try for goal until player control has been reestablished.

I'll be the first to argue that the basketball rules are poorly written (I still haven't found a rule that actually awards the first free throw in the 1 and 1, only the rule that awards the second if the first is successful). However, this issue is fairly clear if you'd actually look at what people are showing you instead of focusing on trying not to be proven wrong.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

4-12-5 explains that 4-12-2 does not apply during rebounding. 4-12-5 is there specifically so people don't do what you are trying to do. It specifies (pretty clearly at that) the circumstances that allow team control to be re-established when it has been ended by rule.

By rule, there is no team control once the ball has become loose on a tap or try for goal until player control has been reestablished.

I'll be the first to argue that the basketball rules are poorly written (I still haven't found a rule that actually awards the first free throw in the 1 and 1, only the rule that awards the second if the first is successful). However, this issue is fairly clear if you'd actually look at what people are showing you instead of focusing on trying not to be proven wrong.

There is a difference between touching a rebound and batting a rebound to a teammate. That is the foundation of the argument.

4.5 does not apply because it is not a "touch". 4.2b. applies because it is a pass.