Backcourt and Block-Charge Play (video)

[JRutledge]

Peace

[Raymond]

Two correct rulings. Would have been back court in high school basketball, but NCAA Men's has different rules in regards to loose balls.

[jakeas2]

Who's call is play 2? Starts in C primary and is not a secondary defender. It may be L's call but clearly C thought it was his because he has a whistle on it.

[jakeas2]

Originally Posted by jakeas2

Who's call is play 2? Starts in C primary and is not a secondary defender. It may be L's call but clearly C thought it was his because he has a whistle on it.

After watching again I don't think it is L's call, but curious what the group thinks.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Two correct rulings. Would have been back court in high school basketball, but NCAA Men's has different rules in regards to loose balls.

While i agree with you in general, wasn't it the offense that lost control of the ball all by themselves without a deflection by the defense? And, would that then mean the exception no longer applies? I know the defense eventually touched it, but they really didn't deflect it away to start with and I thought that is what had to precipitate the situation in order for the exception to apply.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jakeas2

After watching again I don't think it is L's call, but curious what the group thinks.

I think there can be legitimate debate about whether or not that was the primary defender. But the Center official is standing behind another defensive player and not really in a good position to see the play. Maybe the Lead recognized that and took the call.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While i agree with you in general, wasn't it the offense that lost control of the ball all by themselves without a deflection by the defense? And, would that then mean the exception no longer applies? I know the defense eventually touched it, but they really didn't deflect it away to start with and I thought that is what had to precipitate the situation in order for the exception to apply.

Here is the wording for the exception:

"9-12 Art. 5. A pass or any other loose ball (including when a player in control of the ball loses control of the ball when a defensive player bats or deflects it out of his control) in the front court that is deflected by a defensive player, which causes the ball to go into the backcourt may be recovered by either team even if the offense was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt."

I believe the powers that be want us to be very liberal in regards to what a deflection by the defense causes. That is evidenced by the fact that they extended the rule after the season started to include in the exception when the offense is in the back court and a defensive player deflects the ball into the front court that touches an offensive player then is recovered by the offense in the back court.






Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Danvrapp]

Play 1: From a HS perspective, an obvious BC once the play was slowed down. It was bang-bang in real time--and somewhat difficult to tell from the video who touched last during the scramble--so I would have no problem with the tip signal the official gives and the follow-up no call. Rather easy to tell the offensive player made last touch on slo-mo replay, so BC violation upon review.

Play 2: The L would have had a great view if the defender moved laterally into the shooters space. I have no problem with a PC foul here. L gave a preliminary signal right away, so I guess he was sure of what he had. If I'm C here I have no problem with L taking that call from me.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by Danvrapp

Play 1: From a HS perspective, an obvious BC once the play was slowed down. It was bang-bang in real time--and somewhat difficult to tell from the video who touched last during the scramble--so I would have no problem with the tip signal the official gives and the follow-up no call. Rather easy to tell the offensive player made last touch on slo-mo replay, so BC violation upon review.

Play 2: The L would have had a great view if the defender moved laterally into the shooters space. I have no problem with a PC foul here. L gave a preliminary signal right away, so I guess he was sure of what he had. If I'm C here I have no problem with L taking that call from me.

Originally Posted by Raymond

Here is the wording for the exception:

"9-12 Art. 5. A pass or any other loose ball (including when a player in control of the ball loses control of the ball when a defensive player bats or deflects it out of his control) in the front court that is deflected by a defensive player, which causes the ball to go into the backcourt may be recovered by either team even if the offense was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt."

I believe the powers that be want us to be very liberal in regards to what a deflection by the defense causes. That is evidenced by the fact that they extended the rule after the season started to include in the exception when the offense is in the back court and a defensive player deflects the ball into the front court that touches an offensive player then is recovered by the offense in the back court.






Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

The question I have from high school land is the ball never goes into the backcourt itself until it's touched by the player who is in the backcourt. Does that exception still apply in that case then?

Clarification, I'm asking for the NCAA ruling.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

The question I have from high school land is the ball never goes into the backcourt itself until it's touched by the player who is in the backcourt. Does that exception still apply in that case then?

He might have been good the first time he touched it while his hand was touching the division line and the defender had been the last to touch the ball previously. But then his hand comes off the ball, which gives the ball FC status. Then he collects the ball while he has BC status. So he was last to touch and then first to touch.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by Raymond

He might have been good the first time he touched it while his hand was touching the division line and the defender had been the last to touch the ball previously. But then his hand comes off the ball, which gives the ball FC status. Then he collects the ball while he has BC status. So he was last to touch and then first to touch.

To clarify, I meant to ask about the NCAA rule. Fed is clearly a BC

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

To clarify, I meant to ask about the NCAA rule. Fed is clearly a BC

Yes, because the exception applies until someone regains player control.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Here is the wording for the exception:

"9-12 Art. 5. A pass or any other loose ball (including when a player in control of the ball loses control of the ball when a defensive player bats or deflects it out of his control) in the front court that is deflected by a defensive player, which causes the ball to go into the backcourt may be recovered by either team even if the offense was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt."

I believe the powers that be want us to be very liberal in regards to what a deflection by the defense causes. That is evidenced by the fact that they extended the rule after the season started to include in the exception when the offense is in the back court and a defensive player deflects the ball into the front court that touches an offensive player then is recovered by the offense in the back court.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Yes, you have to be very generous with how you interpret the cause to get this to be legal in NCAA and perhaps that is what they want. If that is what they want, why put the words deflect...causes. Why not merely put touched by the defense and remove any ambiguity in the possible interpretations.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yes, you have to be very generous with how you interpret the cause to get this to be legal in NCAA and perhaps that is what they want. If that is what they want, why put the words deflect...causes. Why not merely put touched by the defense and remove any ambiguity in the possible interpretations.

That goes to my problems with rules committees lacking attention to detail. Every rules committee needs to have someone who is anal-retentive.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Raymond

That goes to my problems with rules committees lacking attention to detail. Every rules committee needs to have someone who is anal-retentive.

No hyphen here.