Backcourt Violation called (Video) - Was this the right call?

[JRutledge]

Yes it is an offseason game.



Peace

[just another ref]

No violation 9-9-3

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by just another ref

No violation 9-9-3

I would agree. Since this was a throw-in, a player is permitted to jump from the front court and land in the backcourt without violating. This is not NBA or FIBA, where such actions would normally be illegal.

[Nevadaref]

Not a backcourt violation due to the throw-in exception part of the rule, even though the player lands first with his right foot in the frontcourt and then his left foot in the backcourt. However, he then takes another full step with his right foot without dribbling, which is a traveling violation.

The only way that this would be a backcourt violation under current NFHS rules is if the defender guarding the thrower tipped the pass. That would eliminate the throw-in exception for the offensive player catching the ball. It does not look like that is the case in the video.

[BryanV21]

One foot touched the front court before the other foot hit the backcourt. So, I guess you'd have to determine if it was normal 2-foot landing.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

One foot touched the front court before the other foot hit the backcourt. So, I guess you'd have to determine if it was normal 2-foot landing.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Look at it the other way.
Please describe a landing which is not normal.
Now does what this player did fit that?

[Nevadaref]

BTW the crew did not have the defender tipping the pass.
I determine that from the fact that the shot clock still shows 30 and the Trail chops in time when the offensive player near the division line catches the ball.

[Raymond]

Technically he travelled.

All those who criticize college officials for missing spin move travels I know would have called a travel on this play.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Not a backcourt violation due to the throw-in exception part of the rule, even though the player lands first with his right foot in the frontcourt and then his left foot in the backcourt.

Agree.

During a throwin, any player 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.

Same exception for any player during a jump ball, or for a defensive player in making a steal.

Nice video JRutledge. Thanks.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

BTW the crew did not have the defender tipping the pass.
I determine that from the fact that the shot clock still shows 30 and the Trail chops in time when the offensive player near the division line catches the ball.

In what state is this game being played? Only the T chopped. The L did not even put his hand in the air when he administered the ball. Does that state require only T chops?

[BryanV21]

I didn't mean to imply that there are different ways to land. Saying "normal landing" was incorrect.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bucky

In what state is this game being played? Only the T chopped. The L did not even put his hand in the air when he administered the ball. Does that state require only T chops?

These games are being played in Las Vegas as part of a Summer scouting event with college coaches observing. They are being shown on one of the ESPN channels.
I don't know anything about the officials. They may be working as part of a camp. I know several of the local guys and didn't recognize any of the people working while watching a couple of contests.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I didn't mean to imply that there are different ways to land. Saying "normal landing" was incorrect.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Normal landing is the wording used in the rules book. It is completely correct to use it as your determining standard. Now you must articulate what those words mean to you. If you can't, how can you make a judgment on such a play?

[BryanV21]

I'm on my phone, so I'm not the most articulate now. But I'll try...

Basically if one foot down is immediately followed by the other, or you don't believe the player intended to land on only one foot, then I'd let it go as a normal landing and not a violation in this case.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Technically he travelled.

All those who criticize college officials for missing spin move travels I know would have called a travel on this play.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Why do you write "technically"? He traveled. Period.
I am 100% that I whistle that. I'm looking closely at his landing on such a play so seeing the extra step should be easy.