Jump Ball, then . . .

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

The problem is that no coach would agree with the proper call b/c they do not know the rule ... The no-call results in no explanations/arguments/problems with anyone.

Coaches around here argue no calls as much as they argue calls. They just like to argue. We've got a few (not many, but a few) rule-knowledgeable, veteran coaches who would argue the incorrect no call in the video. Coaches. Can't officiate with them. Can't officiate without them. God put them there to make our life interesting.

[Nevadaref]

The correct call is a backcourt violation.
We have a player from White jumping into the air from his frontcourt, catching the ball, and landing with one foot in his backcourt.
This is a violation unless he qualifies for one of the three exceptions.

A. This is not a throw-in, so that one is out.

B. The jumpball ended when the ball was touched by a non-jumper, so the during a jumpball exception is out.

C. Blue merely batted the ball after the tapper. The touching by Blue never established control and would not have the AP arrow set in favor of
White, hence there is no team control by Blue which could make White a defensive player. Therefore, that exception is out as well.

We are left with the play remaining a backcourt violation.

[Nevadaref]

BTW to preemptively answer some follow-up questions...
Yes, I would call this violation.
Blue will get the ball for a throw-in AND the AP arrow will be set in Blue's favor.
Tough luck for White, but this is no different than if the player had landed with one foot out-of-bounds.
I hope that everyone on this forum would have called that and set the arrow in favor of Blue.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I hope that everyone on this forum would have called that and set the arrow in favor of Blue.

Before this Forum discussion, in the heat of the moment, in a real game (not observing here from the comfort of my chair), my split second decision would have been that it was a steal and a no call. Now I know that I would be wrong, but that would be my call (and it was my call the very first time that I watched the video).

Even though I now know that I would be wrong, by rule, I'm still not 100% convinced (but I am convinced to a lesser degree) that the intent and purpose of the exception would be to strictly define what playing "defense" is.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Before this Forum discussion, in the heat of the moment, in a real game (not observing here from the comfort of my chair), my split second decision would have been that it was a steal and a no call. Now I know that I would be wrong, but that would be my call (and it was my call the very first time that I watched the video).

So you're also setting the arrow to white because B gained initial possession?

Even though I now know that I would be wrong, by rule, I'm still not 100% convinced (but I am convinced to a lesser degree) that the intent and purpose of the exception would be to strictly define what playing "defense" is.

That's the argument that we went round-and-round on some 12 years ago (SWAG) before the NFHS clarified the throw-in exception. Time for you to submit another rules change proposal to the committee.

[Freddy]

The formula we often quote on this forum . . . could it be used to assess whether the OP should be called one way or the other? Or is it invalid regarding that play?

Requirements for a backcourt violation (in order):
1. Player control obtained (inbounds), establishing team control
2. Ball gains frontcourt status (it may or may not be in player control at this point)
3. Ball last touched by team A BEFORE the ball goes into the backcourt
4. Ball first touched by team A AFTER it goes into the backcourt

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

The formula we often quote on this forum . . . could it be used to assess whether the OP should be called one way or the other? Or is it invalid regarding that play?
Requirements for a backcourt violation (in order):
1. Player control obtained (inbounds), establishing team control
2. Ball gains frontcourt status (it may or may not be in player control at this point)
3. Ball last touched by team A BEFORE the ball goes into the backcourt
4. Ball first touched by team A AFTER it goes into the backcourt

Originally Posted by Freddy

Jump Ball, then Backcourt Situation

Freddy. Are you saying that the ball never had any status, frontcourt, nor backcourt, until white landed in the backcourt?

Is that what you're saying? Don't be coy. Just spit it out.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Freddy

The formula we often quote on this forum . . . could it be used to assess whether the OP should be called one way or the other? Or is it invalid regarding that play?

Requirements for a backcourt violation (in order):
1. Player control obtained (inbounds), establishing team control
2. Ball gains frontcourt status (it may or may not be in player control at this point)
3. Ball last touched by team A BEFORE the ball goes into the backcourt
4. Ball first touched by team A AFTER it goes into the backcourt

All of those statements are true.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

So you're also setting the arrow to white because B gained initial possession?

I never said that blue gained first possession. Play on (after my incorrect no call) after white gains first true, by definition, possession. Arrow goes to blue.

9-9-3: ... while on defense, a player may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt.

Was white on defense? No. Just to be sure, let's look up "defense" in Rule 4 Definitions.

Hey, it's an easy backcourt call from the comfort of my chair, after reading dozens of posts, reading over the rule a few times, and reviewing the video a few times.

First time I saw the video, I wasn't thinking "defense", I was thinking "steal" and that's what screwed me up.

It's worth looking at the definition again. It's certainly germane to the situation. Let's look up "defense" in Rule 4 Definitions.