Another backcourt

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Valley Man

White has the ball in their front court. W1 throws an errant pass to W2. The ball sails past W2 for the corner where the division line and the side line meet. Before the ball goes out of bounds or into the back court, W2 saves it behind her back. The ball hits on the division line with English, bounces on the division line, then bounces back into the front court where W1 recovers the ball. No other player touched it. Ruling?

I am not calling a violation on this play. I think the intent of the rule is that the player should be in the backcourt during the touch to be a violation.

[BillyMac]

(Apologies to Oldsmobile.)

Originally Posted by CJP

I am not calling a violation on this play.

I'm probably not calling a violation either, not because of intent and purpose, but because, on this odd bang bang play, I seriously doubt that I could check off all four elements and figure out it's a backcourt violation before it's too late to call. And I also doubt that I'll get any complaints from players, coaches, or fans.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by CJP

I am not calling a violation on this play. I think the intent of the rule is that the player should be in the backcourt during the touch to be a violation.

So a player could, after establishing control in the front court, dribble the ball onto the division line all day long?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

So a player could, after establishing control in the front court, dribble the ball onto the division line all day long?

No. My statement was specific to the original post not to every possible backcourt situation.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CJP

I am not calling a violation on this play. I think the intent of the rule is that the player should be in the backcourt during the touch to be a violation.

The intent is that the offense play within the 42' x 50' (FED, and I'm not getting hung up on the width of the division line) rectangle that defines the front court (while also not prematurely killing the play that would give the defense an advantage).

They didn't.

Call the violation.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The intent is that the offense play within the 42' x 50' (FED, and I'm not getting hung up on the width of the division line) rectangle that defines the front court (while also not prematurely killing the play that would give the defense an advantage).

They didn't.

Call the violation.

No players left the frontcourt and the ball has frontcourt status when recovered. I am not worried about the repercussions of not calling this a violation.

[SNIPERBBB]

Once the ball touches the backcourt after being last touched by the offense, they cant touch the ball again until its touched by the defense.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by CJP

No players left the frontcourt and the ball has frontcourt status when recovered. I am not worried about the repercussions of not calling this a violation.

What about a ball that hits the sideline but the player who last touched it doesn't leave the court?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by zm1283

What about a ball that hits the sideline but the player who last touched it doesn't leave the court?

You are trying to compare an apple to an orange. Both fruit but still different.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by CJP

You are trying to compare an apple to an orange. Both fruit but still different.

But your fruit is sour.

Simply put, you're wrong to argue this shouldn't be called. There is no argument to not call it any more than not calling a ball sailing OOB where A1 attempts to save it but it bounces on the sideline in doing so. The only difference is that in the division line case, team B is allowed to recover it and play on while team A isn't.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

But your fruit is sour.

Simply put, you're wrong to argue this shouldn't be called. There is no argument for not call it any more than not calling a ball sailing OOB where A1 attempts to save it but it bounces on the sideline in doing so. The only difference is that in the division line case, team B is allowed to recover it and play on while team A isn't.

Seriously, I don't care. I am not calling a violation in the described play.

You can and I am okay with that too.

[sdoebler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqfZYht9K0k

8:05 shows this play happening in an NBA game and being called.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by CJP

I am not calling a violation on this play. I think the intent of the rule is that the player should be in the backcourt during the touch to be a violation.

Soooooo, W1, in the FC, could throw the ball, with back spin, into the BC, so that the ball returns to the FC, where W1 could recover?

Just teasing.