Jump Ball, then . . .
 

This was thrown out there over at a kindergarten FB forum today.

I'm thinking this is a no-call due to the "while on defense" exception clause in 9-9-3. But is the blue player's touch enough to establish that he is a defender?

What particular rule(s) do you ascribe to this situation?

Jump Ball, then Backcourt Situation

Omitted Video Now Included
 

Cf. Video...above

Havlicek Stole The Ball! Havlicek Stole The Ball! (Johnny Most) …
 

The four elements for having a backcourt violation are: there must be team control (and initial player control when coming from a throwin); the ball must have achieved frontcourt status; the team in team control must be the last to touch the ball before it goes into the backcourt; that same team must be the first to touch after the ball has been in the backcourt.

... a defensive player, in making a steal; may legally jump from his, or 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. The player may make a normal landing, and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt, or the backcourt.

Then you agree that the blue player's deflection in his backcourt made the white player a defensive player so that when the white player attained player control he was allowed to take advantage of the exception to rule 9 - 3 - 3 "while on defense". Correct?

The "defensive player" exception wouldn't apply during the period immediately after a throw-in before TC inbounds was established. I don't know why it would apply during the same period after a jump ball.

That said, the "right" call is no call.

That, I think, is the reason this is such an interesting play. There is, admittedly, a gap in the rules that does not expressly cover this precise and highly infrequent situation. If it happened right in front of me, my trained impulse would be a no-call due to what I understand about the "while on defense" exception in 9-9-3. That might not be perfectly correct, but it arrives at the same place as Bob, and life goes on without a whistle.

If anything, it makes for a great review of the tenets of the rules regarding backcourt, team control, location of the ball, etc.

Havlicek Stole The Ball ...
 

The white player stole the ball after a tap that could be interpreted as the start of a pass (movement of the ball caused by a player who throws, bats, or rolls the ball to another player, no mention of offense, nor of defense). Can only an offensive player attempt a pass? Can only a defensive player steal the ball? Can a player steal the ball while there is no team control, or player control, and nobody is on either offense, or defense? Will intent and purpose of the rule help solve this conundrum? Some questions are best left unanswered (see recent threads on the new NFHS backcourt rule).

I agree with no call. I wish I could tell you why. I know that I could use some fancy officiating language (as encouraged by NFHS new Point of Emphasis) and talk my way out of an argument with a coach, but I'm not so sure that I could pull the wool over the eyes of the officials on this Forum.

Freddy's Not Dead, Despite What Curtis Mayfield Says ....
 

Nice video Freddy. Thanks.

Two Sides to Every Story - Joe Walsh
 

I can tell you why. It's a no-call because the player intercepted the ball "while on defense" and the exception in 9-9-3 applies.

I can also tell you why I'd defend a partner who calls a backcourt violation on this. Because the player first gained player control -- and thus team control -- in the frontcourt and then stepped into the backcourt.

As of right now I can skate on either sheet of ice.

The Thin Ice (Pink Floyd, 1979) …
 

No matter how thin the ice is?

No Team Control ...
 

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Because there is no team control during the period immediately after a throwin, and thus, no offensive, nor defensive, players?

Lack of team control during the period immediately after a throwin (and, thus lack of offensive, and defensive, players) continues until one team gains player control, and thus, team control?

Same thing (lack of offensive, and defensive, players) during a jump ball continues until one team gains player control, and thus, team control?

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. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.

Would there be any difference in the OP for NCAA/NBA/FIBA rules? To my knowledge, team control exists on a throw-in at those levels when the ball is placed at the disposal of Team A (the team that will be conducting the throw-in), and team control persists until a shot is attempted, the other team gains control of the ball, or the ball becomes dead. Because team control exists on a throw-in, the shot clock (and backcourt count) start when the ball is touched inbounds on a ball legally thrown in to the backcourt.

However, no team control initially exists for a jump ball under any set of rules, until player control is established. In that scenario, there will not be a backcourt violation until a player gains control in the frontcourt and transfers the ball to the backcourt. If that is the case, then the OP situation (defender deflecting and controlling a jump ball) is not different for NCAA/NBA/FIBA rules, but a situation with a throw-in might be different, since NBA and FIBA do not allow the ball to be thrown in to the backcourt until the final 2 minutes of regulation or overtime.

Damn The Traditon, Full Speed Ahead ...
 

Again, for the record, I hate jump balls. To start the game, just give the ball to the visiting team at the division line across from the table and start the alternating possession arrow procedure for the rest of the game, including any possible overtimes.

(Hopefully, Mark T. DeNucci, Sr., won't have his reading glasses on, and won't be able to read this post, otherwise he'll write one of his famous three pages long, "good old days", posts. I really don't care that Mark T. DeNucci, Sr., was James Naismith's college roommate, and the best man at Naismith's wedding, and taught Naismith everything about the rules of basketball.)

There's no difference.

And that's what happened in the OP

There is team control, but only for the purpose of a TC foul.

We went around and around on this many years ago when the TC during a throw-in was put in place. The FED has confirmed that if the OP was a throw-in, by either white or blue, the play would be a BC violation. See these interps from just last year -- especially #4:

SITUATION 3: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the team’s frontcourt. A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. A2 jumps from the team’s frontcourt, catches the ball
in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. The throw-in ends when it is legally touched by B1. When A2 gains possession/control in the air, he/she has frontcourt status. A backcourt violation has occurred when A2 lands in the backcourt. (9-9-1, 9-9-3)

SITUATION 4: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the team’s backcourt (Team B’s frontcourt). A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from his/her frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team B. The throw-in ends with B1’s deflection (legal touch). When B2 gains possession/control in the air, he/she has frontcourt status. A backcourt violation has occurred when B2 lands in backcourt. (9-9-1, 9-9-3)