Another backcourt

[sdoebler]

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

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

[CJP]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

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

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

It is not the same play described in the original post.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CJP

It is not the same play described in the original post.

What about it makes it enough different that you would not call the OP but (presumably) call the NBA play?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

What about it makes it enough different that you would not call the OP but (presumably) call the NBA play?

The ball in the training video has backcourt status; which the narrator makes a point of.

The ball originally discussed has frontcourt status.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by CJP

The ball in the training video has backcourt status; which the narrator makes a point of.

The ball originally discussed has frontcourt status.

No, the ball has backcourt status when it bounces in the backcourt.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, the ball has backcourt status when it bounces in the backcourt.

Sure does. It then has frontcourt status when it bounced back into the frontcourt, assuming the ball strikes the floor before it is touched by W1.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by CJP

Sure does. It then has frontcourt status when it bounced back into the frontcourt, assuming the ball strikes the floor before it is touched by W1.

What surprises me in this discussion is that you seem to believe that the defensive team won't know this was a violation. In my experience watching games, players and coaches are well aware that offensive team bouncing the ball on the midcourt line results in a BC violation. Maybe the players and coaches here are just smarter than where you are . . .

[deecee]

Originally Posted by CJP

Sure does. It then has frontcourt status when it bounced back into the frontcourt, assuming the ball strikes the floor before it is touched by W1.

Partially correct. If the player that touches the ball first when it has "frontcourt" status was on the same team (offense) that was last to touch it when it gained "backcourt" status then the ball still is considered part of the "backcourt" (silly logic) and is a violation.

Where, when, how many times the ball bounces has little/no bearing on the status and violation when the ball is touched in relation to "frontcourt".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CJP

The ball in the training video has backcourt status; which the narrator makes a point of.

The ball originally discussed has frontcourt status.

Thanks. THat's helpful.

It reminds me of some posts here a long time ago to the effect of: For a BC violation to happen, it's not necessary that A touch the ball in the FC or that A touch the ball in the BC. Only that the ball reach the FC, and the BC an A is the last to touch before and first to touch after.

[HokiePaul]

Another reason to call this (and not ignore the rule) is that if you don't call it, you are putting your partner(s) in a tough position. If I'm the C on a play like this, there is a chance that I see the ball bounce in the BC. If I was 100% that the ball hit the BC, I'm coming to get this violation from the C if the T misses it or doesn't know the rule.

This isn't a judgement call/trust your partner call -- it's an obvious (although unusual) violation and I can't defend passing just because it's the Trail's line to call.

For those who are arguing not to call this, what would you do if your partner came and got it?