backcourt violation?

[bbcowboy]

1--Player dribbles parallel to the division line and adjacent to the division line in his frontcourt.
While dribbling, he has both feet in the front court, but the ball touches the floor on the dribble in the backcourt. Is this a backcourt violation?
2--Player dribbles parallel to the division line and adjacent to the division line in his frontcourt.
While dribbling, he places one foot on the division line, but the other foot and the ball remain in the frontcourt, Is this a backcourt violation?
Thanks.

[ODog]

You're omitting a key detail. YOU'RE saying he's dribbling in frontcourt, but we can't be certain you really know what that means (unless you're an official). But taking you literally, both are violations.

1 -- If he's dribbling the ball from backcourt to frontcourt, and all three things (two feet and ball) have yet to touch the frontcourt, then no. But as you describe it, he's already firmly established in frontcourt (i.e., nothing touching backcourt), and then dribbles ball so it touches backcourt … violation.
2 -- As you describe it, he's already firmly established in frontcourt (i.e., nothing touching backcourt), and then steps on division line … violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bbcowboy

1--Player dribbles parallel to the division line and adjacent to the division line in his frontcourt. While dribbling, he has both feet in the front court, but the ball touches the floor on the dribble in the backcourt. Is this a backcourt violation?

Originally Posted by ODog

1 ... But as you describe it, he's already firmly established in frontcourt (i.e., nothing touching backcourt), and then dribbles ball so it touches backcourt … violation.

As described, no backcourt violation.

No backcourt violation unless he touches the ball as it bounces off the floor in the backcourt back to his hand.

If he never touches the ball it's just a ball that bounces into the backcourt, and thus, no backcourt violation.

The four elements for having a backcourt violation are: there must be team control (and initial player control
when coming from a throw-in); the ball must have achieved frontcourt status; the team in team control must
be the last to touch the ball before it goes into the backcourt; that same team must be the first to touch after
the ball has been in the backcourt.

Do not confuse this backcourt play with 9-3-1-Note: A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds. The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary, even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she
is out of bounds.

9-3-1-Note refers to an out of bounds violation, not a backcourt violation.

Two different animals.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bbcowboy

1--Player dribbles parallel to the division line and adjacent to the division line in his frontcourt.
While dribbling, he has both feet in the front court, but the ball touches the floor on the dribble in the backcourt. Is this a backcourt violation?

When a player is dribbling from the BC to the FC, the player must have touched the FC with both feet an the ball. If the player is holding the ball, he has to have both feet completely in the FC. Then if he were to start a dribble and the ball touched the FC, that would be a violation.

Not very clear what happened first on your play. So it is possible this is not a violation of the player never completely came into FC status by the things I just described.

Originally Posted by bbcowboy

2--Player dribbles parallel to the division line and adjacent to the division line in his frontcourt.
While dribbling, he places one foot on the division line, but the other foot and the ball remain in the frontcourt, Is this a backcourt violation?
Thanks.

Again if the player never reached FC status during the dribble, then the answer is no.

Peace

[Altor]

Originally Posted by jrutledge

When a player is dribbling from the BC to the FC, the player must have touched the FC with both feet an the ball. If the player is holding the ball, he has to have both feet completely in the FC. Then if he were to start a dribble and the ball touched the FC BC, that would be a violation.

fify

[bbcowboy]

In my above scenario, the player has already been established in the front court for several seconds, before the described actions.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So it is possible this is not a violation of the player never completely came into FC status by the things I just described.

Agree, but with hindsight, that's not what the original poster meant.

Originally Posted by bbcowboy

... the player has already been established in the front court for several seconds, before the described actions.

Even if the "player ... completely came into FC status (two feet and the ball had frontcourt status) ... this is ... not a violation" unless he touches the ball as it bounces off the floor in the backcourt back to his hand.

If he never touches the ball it's just a ball that bounces into the backcourt, and thus, no backcourt violation.

[sdoebler]

Originally Posted by bbcowboy

In my above scenario, the player has already been established in the front court for several seconds, before the described actions.

If front court status had been established both situations would be a backcourt violation

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

If front court status had been established both situations would be a backcourt violation

Totally disagree with sdoebler's interpretation of Situation 1:

Originally Posted by bbcowboy

1--Player dribbles parallel to the division line and adjacent to the division line in his frontcourt. While dribbling, he has both feet in the front court, but the ball touches the floor on the dribble in the backcourt. Is this a backcourt violation?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As described, no backcourt violation.

No backcourt violation unless he touches the ball as it bounces off the floor in the backcourt back to his hand.

If he never touches the ball it's just a ball that bounces into the backcourt, and thus, no backcourt violation.

The four elements for having a backcourt violation are: there must be team control (and initial player control
when coming from a throw-in); the ball must have achieved frontcourt status; the team in team control must
be the last to touch the ball before it goes into the backcourt; that same team must be the first to touch after
the ball has been in the backcourt.

Do not confuse this backcourt play with 9-3-1-Note: A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds. The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary, even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she
is out of bounds.

9-3-1-Note refers to an out of bounds violation, not a backcourt violation.

The ball could bounce, roll, and remain stationary, in the backcourt and not be a backcourt violation until it's touched by an offensive player.

[sdoebler]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Totally disagree with sdoebler's interpretation of Situation 1:

I'm assuming the ball came back to his hand,

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

I'm assuming the ball came back to his hand,

https://youtu.be/svkgOsr7pUc

It doesn't say that in the original post.

Young'uns, or distracted veterans, may sound the whistle as soon as the ball touches the backcourt.

Anticipate the play, not the call.

Most of us realize that we have to wait for the offensive touch to call a backcourt violation.

Who knows? A defender could come in, make a steal, leading to a dunk down the other end?

More importantly, it's not the correct call.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The ball could bounce, roll, and remain stationary, in the backcourt for eight minutes and not be a backcourt violation until it's touched by an offensive player.

I agree it wouldn't be a backcourt violation. Instead, it would be a 10-second violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree it wouldn't be a backcourt violation. Instead, it would be a 10-second violation.

Nice catch (I fixed it).

I have to watch out when I use hyperbole on the Forum. We've got some pretty sharp members that have been around the block several times and have been to more than just a few rodeos.

And to be honest, though I would hate to admit it, I probably would not start counting. Of course, I would be wrong.

Still being honest, even if a defender flicked (no control) the ball into the backcourt, I'm not 100% sure that I would start counting until an offensive player touched it. Again, I would be wrong.

At least I would get these situations correct on a written test. That has to count for something. Right?

[bbcowboy]

Yes, in both scenarios,
the ball bounces back into his hand.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bbcowboy

Yes, in both scenarios, the ball bounces back into his hand.

Why didn't you say so earlier?

Backcourt violations.