NCAA Vid Request - Sat 3/17 - Kent. vs Buff - BC violation?
 

With 15:57 to go in the game, there is a dribbler reacting to a defender at the division line. In real time, I say no, but in replaying and going frame by frame, I got BC violation. Official gave some sort of mechanic indicating, I think, that the play was legal.

Dribbler has ball deflected in BC at division line, with ball loose, former dribbler crosses division line with both feet, reaches back over the division line, and touches ball in BC, still with both feet in front court. Player then goes to BC and gains control of ball.

That doesn't sound like a violation to me under NCAAM rules (as I understand them).

Player whose team was in control of ball had 2 feet in front court and touched the ball while being there, giving ball FC status also. Player then went into BC and was the first to touch the ball. Based on that, were the conditions met for a BC violation? lol If not, correct me as I want to get it correct.

The player was dribbling the ball and the ball had never touched the floor in the FC, so it remains in the backcourt. All 3 points (both feet AND the ball) have to be in the frontcourt before the ball gains FC status during a dribble.

See OP.

He was not dribbling as it was deflected by the defender. During that moment, while the ball was not in control, the offensive player crossed the division line with both feet. He then reached back and touched the ball, giving the ball FC status. Correct?

He was dribbling from the backcourt to the frontcourt. A deflection by a defender does not necessarily end the dribble. He merely continued the dribble after the deflection.

I had him no longer in control because of the deflection. We will have to agree to disagree.

Control is a matter of judgement and I could see either opinion. If there is any doubt as to control, I'd default to not calling a violation.

Where was the defender who deflected the ball? NCAAM rules have some component about "the offense can be the last to touch in the FC, if the ball is deflected by the defense" type rule (I am not up on the specifics).

If the defense deflects the ball, the offense can touch the ball anywhere and still regain player control in the back court. That's the rule.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

If I recall, defender's status was the offensive team's BC. Really need the video. It was really close and difficult to officiate on a technical level. Bang bang right at the division line.

I don't think that would matter.

I feel it would b/c the ball would then have BC status and Raymond's point would be irrelevant.

I believe the rule allows the offense to regain control without jeopardy of a BC violation. A mere touch by the offense wouldn't necessarily do that.

Raymond is correct.
NCAA M and NFHS are different- NCAA M changed rule on a deflected ball by the defense while the ball has front court status anyone can retrieve if the ball goes in the backcourt. Regardless of last to touch first to touch.

In the OP (and based on subsequent posts) the ball *may not* have been in the FC when it was deflected -- so, based on this (and my subsequent reading of the rule), it may still have been a BC violation (depending, perhaps, on the loss of control / dribble issue).

In any event, if it takes all this to decide, then the official was correct -- no matter what the zapruder film shows. ;)

As Bob said, ball was deflected while defender in BC and ball in BC. Rule change irrelevant as ball never had FC status until offensive player touched it. Really need that video.

Bumping to see if Jeff can find the play.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/J7Z54M6qaTM" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Perfect, can't wait to hear from everybody. Very close but I am going with BC violation. Offensive player, not dribbling, has 2 feet in his FC, reaches and touches ball (giving ball FC status), and ball lands in BC where same player is first to touch it.

He never dribbled in the front Court.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

What is your point? There is no requirement of dribbling in the FC for a BC violation.

On this play there is.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

If you have an interrupted dribble and you never established the ball in the FC, it can matter in this situation.

Now the question does him not dribbling in the FC matter in this specific play. I think there is a case to be made that this could be a violation if you feel the play was with a FC player making the ball touch the BC. But I think that is a stretch. The defender tipped the ball away which allows for no longer have a cheap violation.

Peace

I understand if ball was never established in the FC but in the play, the ball was established in the FC.

When the defender tips the ball away, it does not matter what status the ball has from my understanding. The point is to give the offense some leeway to get the ball. I think the rules are not as clear, but the point of the new rule was not to allow a "cheap" violation if the defense made a play on the ball. That clearly took place here.

Peace

Defender hit the ball while it was in the BC. As far as defense tipping ball, defender tip was irrelevant for rule as offense still had two feet in FC and touched ball giving ball FC status. Then he was first to touch it in BC.

Gonna have to just agree to disagree on this thread.