With the NCAA rule, it was my understanding that cause mattered -- you have to interpret whether the deflection "causes the ball to go into the backcourt" or whether it goes into the backcourt for some other reason.

I see that as different from the determination as to who touched it last in the FC. Your not interpreting what caused the ball to go into the backcourt -- All you have to see to make the correct call is who touched it last in the FC.

So dumb that they STILL haven’t changed the HS goaltending rule to what every other legitimate rule set (NBA, NCAA-M, NCAA-F, FIBA) uses.

There is no gray area. Time or time elapsed has nothing to do with the ruling. Once the defense deflects the ball, the offense is free to regain PC anywhere on the court no matter who touched it last. And until PC is re-established, there can be no BC violation. So NCAA officials no longer have to keep track of who touched the ball last once the defense deflects/bats the ball. As someone who works both rule sets, the college rule is lot simpler to adjudicate.

That is most definitely incorrect.

It is not subjective at all. There has to be a deflection.
Again at the end of the day, this is about wording. But there is nothing that is asking you to interpret how the ball is deflected in the NCAA Rule.

Peace

In that case, I've seen it miscalled where the offense gains PC while heading towards the backcourt but before going into the BC....without a violation.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ptu_0KM-2_8" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ONCKDv970QQ" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Would High School have the same rulings on these videos as NCAA?

If they are adopting the Men's rule it would be. But for some reason, people think they are just changing one interpretation, which is not any evidence this is about one interpretation. They clearly use similar language from the NCAA. I guess we will have to see in the long run, but my bet is that this is the NCAA Rule adoption.

Peace

The play below posted by JRut is an example where judgement is required. This is a objective-based call in HS as the offense was last to touch in the FC. It seems like more of a judgement call at the college level as the official must determine when (and where on the court) PC is re-established.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ONCKDv970QQ" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

How is this subjective? The defender touched the ball or was have ruled to have touched or deflected as the rule says the ball. If the defender never touched the ball, then you just ruled that the defender never touched the ball. But if the defender deflects the ball, then the offense (or defense how the rule reads), anyone can go get the ball in the backcourt. And in this NF change, it says if the defense deflects the ball, then all bets are off as to who can go get the ball. The language is almost the same.

In the "old" NF interpretation, it was only one type of play and that was when the ball was touched and a player was airborne jumping from the FC and contacted the ball and landed in the BC. That is not what the NF is saying at all based on their current language they are using.

I am not seeing some drastic difference.

Peace

Again, we have an atrociously worded rule from the NFHS. The EXCEPTION does not address the rule about the ball being last touched in the FC by the offense.

Here are some NCAA Approved Rulings on the topic.

They backed up their position, so not sure what is subjective?

A.R. 222. The ball is at the disposal of Team A for a throw-in. A1 attempts to throw the inbounds pass to A2, who is located in his front court near the division line.

1. A1’s pass is deflected by B1. A2 leaves the playing court in his front court and while airborne, controls the ball, and then lands with one or both feet in the backcourt.

2. A1’s throw-in pass is deflected by B1. The ball bounces into Team A’s
front court. While the ball is bouncing in Team A’s front court, it is
deflected into Team A’s backcourt, where A3 retrieves it.

3. A1’s throw-in pass is deflected by A2, who fumbles it into the backcourt.
A2 then goes into the backcourt and recovers the fumble.

RULING 1: Legal play. Since a Team B player deflected A1’s inbounds
pass, when A2 catches the ball in the air and lands with one or both
feet in the backcourt, B1’s deflection caused the ball to go into Team
A’s backcourt, and a Team A player is permitted to be the first to touch the ball in the backcourt.
(Rule 9-12.1 through .3, .5 through .7 and .9 through .10, and 7-6.5)

2: Legal. This is not a backcourt violation since neither player nor team
control had been established in the front court.
(Rule 9-12.4)

3: Legal. This is not a backcourt violation since neither player nor team
control had been established in the front court.
(Rule 9-12.4, and 9-12.1 through .3, .5 through .7 and .9 through .10)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A.R. 223. A1 is in possession of the ball in the front court and throws a pass
to A2, who is located near the division line. A1’s pass is errant. A2 leaves the
playing court with both feet in an attempt to prevent the ball from going into
the backcourt. While in the air, A2 gains possession of the ball and throws it
into the playing court, where it strikes the division line. The ball returns to the
front court, where A3 recovers the ball before it is touched by an opponent.

RULING: Team A has committed a backcourt violation. The official shall blow the whistle for the backcourt violation when the ball is touched by A3 in the front court after it touched the division line. Team A had control of the ball in its front court and the ball was last touched by Team A without a deflection by Team B before going into the backcourt.
(Rule 9-12.4 and 9-12.1 through .3, .5 through .7 and .9 through .10)

Peace

2018-19 Rules Comments

An EXCEPTION added to the backcourt violation (9-9-1): To ensure that an offensive team is not unfairly penalized when the ball is deflected by the defense from the frontcourt to the backcourt. This exception allows the offense to recover the ball (that still has frontcourt status) in the backcourt without penalty. This also makes the play situation on the deflected pass consistent with other codes with very similar team control and backcourt rules

Your shifting all over the place now. We have to judge PC all the time. In HS games under 2017-18 NFHS rules, if the defense deflects a pass and the offense chases it down near the division line, we would have to determine PC. No different on this play.

Under 2017-18 NFHS rules, if players from both teams touch the ball before going to the BC, we have to know who touched it last to determine a BC violation. In NCAA, we don't have to worry about that detail.

Again, I work both rule sets. Never once heard a college official complain about the new rule at the college level. I have heard plenty of college officials praise the new rule.