Last to touch/first to touch

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... we will know when everything comes out.

Agree. Patience is a virtue.

“Everything will be okay in the end. If it's not okay, it's not the end.” (John Lennon)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by OKREF

In a staff meeting for a camp, and was just told this is no longer a violation.

There has been no guidance from the NFHS that says such, so that would be hearsay unless that person is on the NFHS rules committee.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well that would be the NCAA Rule.

Now if you do not mind us asking. Who told you that or why are they so confident that is the rule? I think it is obvious, but I just want to know why you are convinced that is the actual interpretation since many here seemed to be convinced this was about just an interpretation?

Peace

Camp director of our state association.

[Freddy]

I'm looking for two video clip to illustrate, for training purposes:

1) What the 2017-18 NFHS Interpretation Situation 7 would look like (which, apparently, the newly announced Exception to rule 9-9-1 would retract), and

2) What the NCAA-M's backcourt rule 4-12-5 looks like (in the frontcourt the ball deflects off the defender then off the offensive player into the backcourt where either team may then recover the ball).

For as much debate as there is about these two rulings, I can't find a clip of either nor an example of either in all the game video I have in archive. Maybe the NCAA-M distributed a video example when they changed their rule a couple of years ago. Can anybody post a clip of each example?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I'm looking for two video clip to illustrate, for training purposes:

1) What the 2017-18 NFHS Interpretation Situation 7 would look like (which, apparently, the newly announced Exception to rule 9-9-1 would retract), and

2) What the NCAA-M's backcourt rule 4-12-5 looks like (in the frontcourt the ball deflects off the defender then off the offensive player into the backcourt where either team may then recover the ball).

Freddy,
To use for training purposes, here's one example of what the NCAA-M's backcourt rule 4-12-5 looks like: NCAA-M's Backcourt Rule Exception - Clip 1
And here's another: NCAA-M Backcourt Rule Exception - Clip 2

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

... the NCAA-M's backcourt rule 4-12-5 looks like: NCAA-M's Backcourt Rule Exception - Clip 1

Nice clip. Thanks.

Let's hold onto this in case JRutledge is correct and the NFHS really has fully moved to the NCAA rule. We should also hold onto this in case the NFHS hasn't made the full switch to demonstrate the difference between the NCAA exception and the NFHS exception.

It would be nice to get a clip of the stupid interpretation, so we know what is now allowed, not that we really need it, because many of us would have allowed it in our games before the new exception anyway.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Nice clip. Thanks.

Let's hold onto this in case JRutledge is correct and the NFHS really has fully moved to the NCAA rule. We should also hold onto this in case the NFHS hasn't made the full switch to demonstrate the difference between the NCAA exception and the NFHS exception.

It would be nice to get a clip of the stupid interpretation, so we know what is now allowed, not that we really need it, because many of us would have allowed it in our games before the new exception anyway.

Im betting that that play is and will still be a violation under NFHS. The way the rule reads in the press release the only that will be changing is that the requirement for the offense to let the ball bounce in the BC first before being able to recover a deflection by the defense is the only thing that has changed. Guess I will see at the state interpreter's meeting.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Freddy,
To use for training purposes, here's one example of what the NCAA-M's backcourt rule 4-12-5 looks like:

NCAA-M's Backcourt Rule Exception - Clip 1


NCAA-M Backcourt Rule Exception - Clip 2

Hope that helps.

Peace

[JRutledge]

The only thing about the second play is it looks like the defender did not touch the ball. If that is the case, then this is a violation under NCAA Rules.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The only thing about the second play is it looks like the defender did not touch the ball.

Isn't he nearest official giving the "tip" signal to indicate that the defender deflected the ball? This is a relatively new (I still haven't gotten used to using it) official IAABO signal, and I don't know it it's an official NCAA signal.

The first time I through the video, I (like JRutledge) also believed that the defender didn't touch the ball. The second time through I noted that "tip" signal by the nearest official and figured that the had a better look than me.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

... the only that will be changing is that the requirement for the offense to let the ball bounce in the BC first before being able to recover a deflection by the defense is the only thing that has changed.

.. and that's the basis for the odd interpretation.

SITUATION 7: A1, in the team’s frontcourt, passes towards A2, also in the team’s frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team A’s backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team A’s frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team A’s backcourt, but never having touched in Team A’s backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team A’s backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1, 4-4-3, 9-9-1)

Whether, or not, the NFHS makes the full switch to the NCAA rule, one thing is for sure, that the odd interpretation is gone, long gone. So long. Farewell. Sayonara. Arrivederci. Goodbye.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Isn't he nearest official giving the "tip" signal to indicate that the defender deflected the ball? This is a relatively new (I still haven't gotten used to using it) official IAABO signal, and I don't know it it's an official NCAA signal.

The first time I through the video, I (like JRutledge) also believed that the defender didn't touch the ball. The second time through I noted that "tip" signal by the nearest official and figured that the had a better look than me.

My comment was not about the tip signal. My comment was about the play. It did not look like the defender touched the ball in the video. I have seen officials default to a signal and there was no touch that took place. I am just saying that if the dribbler had a bad dribble and knocked the ball in the BC on his own, then it is a violation under NCAA Rules and the current NF Rule.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It did not look like the defender touched the ball in the video. I am just saying that if the dribbler had a bad dribble and knocked the ball in the BC on his own, then it is a violation under NCAA Rules and the current NF Rule.

First time through, I saw the same as you. Could the official have gotten himself straight lined and guessed?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

First time through, I saw the same as you. Could the official have gotten himself straight lined and guessed?

I think he guessed. Now if he was right the angle we had was not great.

Peace

[Freddy]

The clip is intended to be an illustration, so one using it as an instructional tool might want to set it up so as to make the point intended.

At the risk of being castigated as a ballwatcher, I was C on this play and saw that the defender did deflect the ball after which the dribbler deflected it into the backcourt and then was first to touch. This defensive deflection, though slight, can be detected when viewing the clip in slow motion. This was a high school game, the first of last season, and the call was not correct. But it made for a good learning opportunity at that time and I think the clip can be of value as a resource to teach what the recently revised NCAA-M backcourt rule now considers an exception.

Other clips do exist, but the debatable point on several of them is whether the "last to touch" offensive player actually executed a controlled dribble as the ball went toward his backcourt.