Another backcourt

[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 . . .

[Valley Man]

You are right Raymond .. I amended my original post

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 striking the floor once before W1 recovers the ball. No other player touched it. Ruling?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

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 . . .

Don't think too deeply about what you think I believe. My thoughts on why this is a no call, for me personally, is not as simple as you described.

There are some plays where a call, even if correct, can have a much more negative effect on the game then a no-call. I don't think there are many but there are some. I think this is one of those plays as it is EXACTLY described. Keep in mind, this is the first time I ever gave this play any thought and if I encounter this situation and it plays out different from what I have in my mind now, I will reverse my position.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by CJP

There are some plays where a call, even if correct, can have a much more negative effect on the game then a no-call.

For which team exactly and why are you making this decision? As an impartial arbiter of the game the "effect" of one's calls shouldn't have any impact on the job at hand.

"game management" has it's place, however enforcing the rules > "game management".

[CJP]

Originally Posted by deecee

For which team exactly and why are you making this decision? As an impartial arbiter of the game the "effect" of one's calls shouldn't have any impact on the job at hand.

"game management" has it's place, however enforcing the rules > "game management".

I have had an official tell me to call 5 fouls as fast as I can on problem players to get them out of the game so the kid does not ruin the game. I disagree with that. I have had an official tell me to rule a block/charge based on the score spread (team is down 30, they will get the call). I disagree with that. I have had officials tell me to hold my whistle on a foul 80 feet from the basket. I kind of agree with this depending on the outcome of the contact.
These officials are "state tournament" level officials. I guess I am damned if I do and damned if I don't.

I will continue to work hard on every play and put myself in the best position possible to make the correct decision. I will continue to give it 100% when I am on the court no matter the level. If I can do these things, no one will care if I pass on the call described in the original post.

[deecee]

The only one I agree with is a bang/bang block/charge in a blowout. The team ahead will be the "offender" every time.

Being a "state" official doesn't mean they are the most qualified unfortunately....When in Rome

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by CJP

I have had an official tell me to call 5 fouls as fast as I can on problem players to get them out of the game so the kid does not ruin the game. I disagree with that. I have had an official tell me to rule a block/charge based on the score spread (team is down 30, they will get the call). I disagree with that. I have had officials tell me to hold my whistle on a foul 80 feet from the basket. I kind of agree with this depending on the outcome of the contact.
These officials are "state tournament" level officials. I guess I am damned if I do and damned if I don't.

I will continue to work hard on every play and put myself in the best position possible to make the correct decision. I will continue to give it 100% when I am on the court no matter the level. If I can do these things, no one will care if I pass on the call described in the original post.

You might get away with it, but that does not make it right. Are you also going to pass on a similar save that bounces on the sideline instead? Why or why not?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You might get away with it, but that does not make it right. Are you also going to pass on a similar save that bounces on the sideline instead? Why or why not?

I would not pass on an OOB call where the ball hits the line. There is nothing else to take into consideration when the ball strikes the line. A backcourt violation comes with caveats that don't exists with the OOB violation and you know it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by CJP

I would not pass on an OOB call where the ball hits the line. There is nothing else to take into consideration when the ball strikes the line. A backcourt violation comes with caveats that don't exists with the OOB violation and you know it.

Still doesn't matter, but OK. Do you ignore it when A1 (in the FC) throws a bounce pass across the court to A2 (also in the FC) such that it bounces on the division line?

In the end, you really have no rational argument for not calling this. If you want to write the rules, get on the rules committee. Otherwise, being a renegade only makes it hard for everyone.

[rsl]

Originally Posted by CJP

There are some plays where a call, even if correct, can have a much more negative effect on the game then a no-call.

If you are savvy enough to make this no-call, you should be savvy enough to make a "no-post" on this thread.

Posting that "I am not going to enforce a rule just because" will always invoke a negative response on this board.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by rsl

If you are savvy enough to make this no-call, you should be savvy enough to make a "no-post" on this thread.

Posting that "I am not going to enforce a rule just because" will always invoke a negative response on this board.

I see your point and it is well taken.