Example of 9-9-1 EXCEPTION?

[hoopsaddict01]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

How is that a violation? The offensive player did not cause the ball to go to the backcourt. It was touched by a defender and put the ball in the backcourt.



Peace

The ball never contacts the backcourt; therefore, it still has frontcourt status and the defense does not cause the ball to go into the backcourt the offense does.

Just the same as if you change the play to where the division line is a boundary line (either sideline or endline). In that situation the ball would still be inbounds and when the offense touches the ball while standing out of bounds, the ball now has out-of-bounds status and the ensuing throw-in would be awarded to the defense.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hoopsaddict01

The ball never contacts the backcourt; therefore, it still has frontcourt status and the defense does not cause the ball to go into the backcourt the offense does.

Just the same as if you change the play to where the division line is a boundary line (either sideline or end line). In that situation the ball would still be inbounds and when the offense touches the ball while standing out of bounds, the ball now has out-of-bounds status and the ensuing throw-in would be awarded to the defense.

The rule does not say it has to contact the backcourt. It says it can touch a player in the frontcourt, which it did in the video.

And a boundary line is has nothing to do with a backcourt violation. Two very different situations for very different reasons.

Here is what the rule actually says.

9-9-2 says:

While in player and team control in its backcourt, a player shall not cause the ball to go from the backcourt to the frontcourt and return the to backcourt, without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, such that he/she or a teammate is the first to touch the backcourt.

A player touched the ball in the FC so that part does not apply to a violation this rule describes. This was a pass that was touched by a FC player (it did not distinguish offensive or defensive player) and then brought the ball to the BC.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... a boundary line is has nothing to do with a backcourt violation.

I think I know your intent here (an airborne ball passing over a division line boundary), but it's still a poor choice of words (nothing is a very strong word). Try calling a backcourt violation on a court with no division line boundary. Try ignoring a backcourt violation when an offensive player in team control in his frontcourt is dribbling the ball and steps on the division line boundary.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by hoopsaddict01

The ball never contacts the backcourt; therefore, it still has frontcourt status and the defense does not cause the ball to go into the backcourt the offense does.

I think we agree with that. So, show the rule that says "it's a violation to cause the ball to go to the back court."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... show the rule that says "it's a violation to cause the ball to go to the back court."

You know that we can't because it's not a rule, otherwise we wouldn't have to wait until the ball touches an offensive player before we sound the whistle for a backcourt violation. The ball could possibly bounce five or six times in the backcourt and go out of bounds on the backcourt endline before we sound the whistle for an out of bounds violation, with nary a backcourt call.