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

Yes it is an offseason game.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QUKyBVlbLuQ" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

Exception ...
 

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.

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?

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

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.

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?

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

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.

Bang Bang ...
 

Agree. However, as the trail I would have been so intent on instantly determining that this was a backcourt exception, that I may have overlooked the travel. I would hope that I would catch it, but may have been distracted by the bang bang exception.

I would hazard to guess that many officials would do the same. They would be so excited to know the rule explicitly, not call a violation, and overlook the obvious travel. Everyone (coaches/players/spectators) else would be doing the same. They would anxiously be waiting for the BC ruling that most would not realize such an obvious travel.

Ignore the potential backcourt violation. I see officials not call that move a travel frequently....without anything else complicating things.

RE: traveling violation - does the T have the proper angle that allows him to definitively see the status of the ball and player control? I'm not certain he does from what this video reveals. And, that's essential when determining if a traveling violation occurs. I'm not even sure the C has a good secondary look.

It's also essential to ruling a BC violation on a throw-in.

Yep. I think that "we" tend to give a little more than the strict reading of the rules allow when a player catches a pass and sometimes when they come to a stop on a (moving) dribble.

As a friend and high-level official likes to say, 'don't go looking for boogers.'

If you're calling anything on this, it's a booger.

"We" includes me. If it isn't 100% obvious and certain...no travel. If there is a gray area with regards to whether the player had "caught" the ball or not, the player didn't catch the ball.

That's why I wouldn't have a travel. The player touched the ball in the frontcourt, but only controlled it in the backcourt. There must be player control for both a backcourt violation and for traveling, and since there was no player control, neither rule was violated.

The Benefit Of Slow Motion Replay ...
 

He controlled the ball while airborne. No doubt, especially in slow motion replay. He controlled the ball while having frontcourt status (jumped from frontcourt).

But even with airborne control, it can't be a backcourt violation because of the throwin exception, not due to lack of player control.

But with airborne control the player in the video definitely traveled, lifting the first foot to touch down, the pivot foot, said foot returning to the floor (before the ball is released on a pass or a try).

The recent question being discussed is whether, or not, the calling official would get a good look and be able to see the travel without the benefit of a slow motion replay?

Most of us don't call fouls, or violations unless we're sure.

Two things taught to us by that great basketball official Confucius that are worth remembering:

You are where you were until you get where you're going.

When in doubt, don't be.

That's not illegal. The pivot must be returned to the floor for a traveling violation to occur, unless the player starts a dribble.

Erratum ...
 

Good point. Thanks. I'll correct it.

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.-...=0&w=300&h=300

Hiding the ball under his wing. Didn't start a dribble. Not passing. Not shooting. Travel? Not yet. Be patient, and he'll eventually travel.

Well, actually the first foot to touch may return to the floor if A1 executes a proper jump stop.

Both Feet Airborne ...
 

I don't believe that the player in the video meets the following parameters for such a legal jump stop:

Traveling is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits
while holding the ball. The limits on foot movements are as follows:
A player, who catches the ball while moving or dribbling, may stop,
and establish a pivot foot as follows:
a. If both feet are off the floor and the player lands:
3. On one foot, the player may jump off that foot and simultaneously land
on both. Neither foot can be a pivot in this case.
After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot:
a. The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the floor, before the ball is
released on a pass or try for goal.
b. If the player jumps, neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball
is released on a pass or try for goal.
c. The pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released, to start a dribble.

Once that second (nonpivot) foot comes down, his legal options become more restricted. And even further restricted if the pivot foot is lifted (no dribble allowed).

Nevadaref and Raymond make great points. It has always been my contention that block/charge is not the most difficult call in basketball, it's traveling. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

I didn't say he did. I'm correcting your post where you said the first foot to touch the floor cannot retouch the floor prior to shooting or passing the ball.

Gyrations ...
 

My first introduction to the travel rule being not about counting steps (as I had previously believed as a player), but about identifying the pivot foot and the restrictions on the pivot foot, occurred as a rookie official. Even though it was almost forty years ago, I can still remember our local interpreter, who was responsible for teaching our rookie rules training classes (preparing us to take the IAABO written rules exam), demonstrating, in a classroom setting, without a basketball, all the permutations, combinations, and gyrations of the travel rule (many years before the use of video for training) like he was teaching us dance steps (one, two, cha cha cha) in slow motion. Anybody walking by that classroom, at a local college, would have stopped, stared, and walked away scratching their heads.

IAABO letter:

The intent of this video is to clarify a prior interpretation from the NFHS with regard to a play situation that the NFHS had previously interpreted to be a backcourt violation. The NFHS has NOT adopted any part of the NCAA Men's backcourt rules that govern a ball deflected by a defensive player. Very little will change from the perspective of NFHS governed players, coaches, or officials, as this situation happens so infrequently that many officials will most likely never see this situation in their officiating careers - so infrequent that we couldn't find a single game situation play to illustrate the scenario and "staged" a play to illustrate the scenario.

The clarification … If Team A has team control in its frontcourt and the ball is batted, tapped, tipped, or deflected INTO THE AIR by a Team B player and BEFORE THE BALL HITS THE FLOOR, touches, is touched by, caught, or otherwise controlled by a Team A player WHO IS STANDING IN TEAM A's BACKCOURT OR OTHERWISE HAS BACKCOURT STATUS, Team A has NOT committed a backcourt violation. There is no rule change with regard to backcourt violations!

In a prior year's NFHS interpretation (2017 - 2018 Basketball Rules Interpretations, Oct. 6, 2017), this was to be ruled a backcourt violation by Team A. The new interpretation clarifies that this is not a backcourt violation.

Click https://u5486690.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/...5PezxCB6gtg-3D to view the play.

This is the wrong thread. The video in the OP had nothing to do with a tipped ball being caught in the backcourt, it concerns the way a player lands.

I believe you want this thread or this one.