Mark Padgett, I know you are probably tired of answering backcourt questions, but I was just wondering if you would please post your discertation on backcourt one more time since it is the beginning of season and me and no doubt many others could really stand the review. Thanks.

Wow - a personal request on a discussion board. This confirms I'm a legend in my own mind. :) (although some coaches and, of course, my wife would say "What mind?)

Here's the definitive statement on "over and back" compiled from years of posts from such respected contributors to discussion boards as Bradley Batt, Bob Jenkins and Camron Rust.

Under NF rules, there must be four elements present to have an over and back call. If even one of the elements are missing, you do not have the call - period - no exceptions. The four elements are:

1) there must be team control
2) the ball must have achieved frontcourt status
3) the team in team control must be the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt
4) that same team must be the first to touch the ball after it has been in the backcourt

Note there is no condition requiring player control.

At a clinic a few years ago, a veteran ref told me he was reluctant to make this call in the following situation: A1 dribbling in frontcourt. B1 hits the ball off A1's leg and the ball goes into A's backcourt where it is first touched by a member of team A. He said he feels, that in this case (which does happen every once in a while) B1 "caused" the ball to go into the backcourt, even though it hit off A1's leg. I explained to him that, under NF rules, the last player to touch a ball before it does something is the player that "causes" the ball to do whatever it did.

I told him to look at it this way: if after hitting A1 in the leg, the ball would have gone OOB, whose ball would it be and why? He said it would be team B's ball because A1 was last to touch before going OOB. I said that it is the same principle. He thought about it and agreed.

I'd just add a couple of things to Mark's post:

1) Note that items 1 and 2 are separate -- you need team control, and the ball has to heve been in the front court, but you don't need "team control in the front court"

2) Item 3 doesn't really mean that Team A needs to touch the ball in the front court. If they were the last to touch it in the backcourt, then it went to the front court and returned to the backcourt untouched, it would still be a violation for A to touch first in the backcourt.

But when does the count start?
 

Just a joke... just a joke.

history lesson
 

Bob is absolutely right. Here's a bit of trivia to explain why his item #2 came into being. A long time ago, when I first started as a ref (George Mikan era), I asked a veteran official why this was so. He told me that until the rule was changed to reflect this, a team in the backcourt that was nearing a ten second violation, could throw the ball off an official in the front court, have the ball rebound back to them and avoid the 10 second violation. Remember, the 10 second count ends when the ball achieves frontcourt status.

The guy I asked said he got the answer straight from Dr. Naismith ;)

Also - to head off the obvious next question regarding his point, no - this doesn't apply to a player who is standing with one or both feet in the backcourt and dribbles the ball in the front court. There is a specific rule that governs this situation. It is called the "3 points rule" and, for all you newbies, it has nothing to do with a 3 point basket.

Okay guys, explain the rule where a player throws a pass from backcourt and an airborne player catches the ball and lands with feet on both sides of the line. Does it matter which foot comes down first-front or back court? And of course, what if the player jumps from frontcourt, catches the ball airborne, and lands in backcourt. And what about the player who jumps from frontcourt and catches the pass and lands with a foot on each side of the line?

Ralph,
The ball is in the backcourt in the start of your situations.
The player catching the ball is considered to be where he was when he left the floor, while he is in the air. (jumped from FC, catches the ball = FC Ball before he lands)
If catcher lands with both feet simultaneously, or as we say "close enuff", on both sides of the line, he has landed in the back court. (jumps from BC, catches the ball = BC,if he lands on both sides he is in BC; or jumps from FC catches the ball = FC in the air, if he lands on both sides, then Over-back violation)
If the catcher lands one foot first, then another, he is considered to be in the court of his first landing foot.
mick

Re: But when does the count start?
 

When the pumpkin gives up his lunch?

Ralph,

Our assocaition has a discussion board on our web site. For the past two weeks we have been discussing BC plays. Check it out at http://www.saoa.faync.com and follow the links to the discussion board. There are some very good plays on the board, some of which you asked about above.

Of course, everyone else is invited too.

Tony

I tried it... I liked it.

Re: Re: But when does the count start?
 

[/QUOTE]

When the pumpkin gives up his lunch?

[/QUOTE]

Nice pumpkin Dan. Is it yours?

Re: Re: Re: But when does the count start?
 

When the pumpkin gives up his lunch?

[/QUOTE]

Nice pumpkin Dan. Is it yours? [/QUOTE]

Nah, I got it from Mick (thanks Mick!). It's great,
isn't it?

Re: Re: Re: Re: But when does the count start?
 

Nice pumpkin Dan. Is it yours? [/B][/QUOTE]

Nah, I got it from Mick (thanks Mick!). It's great,
isn't it? [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes, it is. I wish thee was someone to share it with everyone. Thanks mick!

Need Scenario
 

This is a hard one to understant without a scenario to think about. Can you (Mark or Bob) please post one where this would apply? Thanks in advance!

Re: Need Scenario
 

Paul - I covered this in a post above in this same thread. The ball could be passed into the front court and hit an official, then bounce back into the back court. In a highly improbable scenario, a ball could be thrown off the backboard from back court, then come back into the back court untouched, although you would have to rule the initial throw was a pass, not a shot to have the violation.

Hey - I said it was highly improbable. In fact, if this ever happens to anyone, please post it so we can all call you a liar :)

Re: Need Scenario (and more...)
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Quote:

The ball could be passed into the front court and hit an official, then bounce back into the back court.

OK, that's the scenario, now tell me (and any other dope-heads like me) why hitting the official standing in the front court on a bad pass from back court would establish front court status for the ball? Doesn't there need to be "all three" in the front court?

Honestly guys, when questions like this come up I wonder how I ever pulled a 98 on last year's part 2 test! Sheesh! :confused:

Re: Re: Need Scenario (and more...)
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul LeBoutillier

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Padgett Quote: The ball could be passed into the front court and hit an official, then bounce back into the back court. OK, that's the scenario, now tell me (and any other dope-heads like me) why hitting the official standing in the front court on a bad pass from back court would establish front court status for the ball? Doesn't there need to be "all three" in the front court? Honestly guys, when questions like this come up I wonder how I ever pulled a 98 on last year's part 2 test! Sheesh! :confused:

Paul,
All three on a dribble only. :)
mick

one more question, MARK!
 

A1 throws the ball from backcourt to A2. A2 is standing with 1 foot in front and 1 foot in back court. He jumps to catch the ball and lands in backcourt. Violation or not? Did he have front or back court status when he jumped and caught the ball?

Re: one more question, MARK!
 

If he was straddling the line, he's in the BC. Let's say A2 was standing in the FC, jumped, caught the ball, and then landed in the BC. This is a BC violation. Why? Because A2 was in the FC when he caught the ball. It doesn't matter that his ffet weren't touching the floor. In basketball, you are were you left the floor when you're airborne.

If the pass had been a throw-in, it wouldn't have mattered because 9-9 Exception 1 would apply. The ball would still have attained FC status when A2 caught it, but the exception allows him to land in the BC on a throw-in.

To expound on the "three points," it's an area that a lot of officials get confused about. Just remember that the rule is referring to dribbling the ball from the BC to the FC. When the ball is passed into the FC, FC status has been attained as soon as the ball hits the floor, a player, an official or the backboard or rim in the FC.

I hope that helps.

?
 

I appreciate your answer but you expounded on everything except the question I asked about. When a player jumps into the air with 1 foot out of bounds and catches the ball, he is OOB. With that in mind, I fail to understand why the player who jumps to catch a pass with a foot in front and the other in back court has backcourt status. Please explain, thAnks, Ralph.

Re: Backcourt Status
 

I think the player you describe does have backcourt status.

NFHS 4-35-3 (paraphrased) says an airborne player's location is determined by where he/she was last in contact with the floor.

NFHS 4-3-2 says "A ball which is in contact with a player is in the frontcourt if neither the ball nor the player is touching the backcourt."

Based on the latter, I would say the player has backcourt status before he/she became airborne. Based on the former, he/she would retain that status while airborne.

Re: ?
 

Ralph,

Maybe this will help, if I understand what you're asking:

1.
A player needs both feet in the front court (or both + the
ball if dribbling) in order to obtain FC status.
2.
A player who jumps retains the status he had while on the
floor (as you pointed out in your OOB example).

So, a player with 1 foot in the BC has BC status. When he
jumps he still has BC status. He can catch the ball and
legally land in the FC or the BC, but remember to keep
counting to 10 if he lands BC.
Also, remember it's legal for a defensive player to
jump from his FC, steal a pass and land in his BC (exception
to the rule to not penalize good play) and all bets are off
generally on a throw in and jump ball. In these cases it is
a violation if the player who catches the ball in the air
had FC status (jumped from FC) and *passes* the ball to a
team mate with BC status. I think that covers all of it.

I though I did with my first paragraph
 

It's the same reason that your first player was OOB.

If a player is straddling the sideline, one foot OOB and one foot inbounds, he is OOB.

Likewise, if a player is straddling the division line, one foot in the FC and one foot in the BC, he is in the BC.

As Dan said, both feet must be inbounds for the player to be inbounds and both feet must be in the FC for the player to be in the FC.

Read 4-35-2. This rule encompasses everything we're talking about here.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Nov 7th, 2000 at 09:33 AM]

Thanks BktBallOfficial and others, I think I've got it now.

A Complication
 

One additional note on the "jumping and landing front court then back court": There is an exception for a throw-in. A player can jump from the front court to catch the ball, land with one foot in the front court, then the second in the back court and he has legitiment back court status (no violation). The exception does not apply if a foot is touching the front court when he catches the ball.

The play I see more often and really confuses people is two guards bring the ball down the court. The player with the ball crosses the division line, establishing front court status. He then turns and passes the ball to his team mate, who leaps from the back court, catches the ball over the front court (ball does not break plane), and lands in the front court. The call is "over-and-back" because the ball achieved back court status when caught by the player with back court status (because he last touched the floor in the back court).

I think 1 more situation should be mentioned. A1 is dribbling in backcourt towards frontcourt. We all know that to gain frontcourt status he must cross the line with both feet and the ball. But, what if he is stopped by a guard at the division line? If his pivot foot remains in backcourt, he can touch frontcourt and then go back to backcourt with his non-pivot foot without penalty. But, if his pivot foot is in frontcourt and his non-pivot foot is in backcourt, once the non-pivot foot goes to frontcourt it must remain there because if the non-pivot foot returns to backcourt---violation. Does everyone agree with this?

Ralph,
Your wording could read "...once the (BC) non-pivot foot <u>is lifted </u>,it may not be returned to the backcourt without violating. (Holding the ball is assumed)
mick

Yes and no. The pivot foot is in the FC. The foot in the BC doesn't need to be placed in the FC for the player to attain FC status. As soon as the foot in the BC is lifted, the player and ball are now in the FC. He doesn't have to put the foot down in the FC to be in the FC. If he simply lifts the foot in the BC and places it back down in the BC, we have a violation.