Creighton-Gonzaga backcourt play
 

4:10 left in first half. Gonzaga defender tips ball off Creighton foot and into the backcourt. Creighton recovers, official gives tip signal, play on.

Is it fair to assume that in NCAAM, a defensive tip effectively eliminates the last/first principle that prevails in HS?

No - they missed it.

NCAA And NFHS Backcourt Differences ...
 

While tjones1 may be correct, and while I know more about quantum physics than I know about NCAA rules, I believe that there is a difference in the NFHS and NCAA backcourt rule (something involving tips), I'm just not sure if the difference applies here.

JRutledge may have some relevant input here, I remember him discussing the differences here on the Forum in great detail a while back.

I believe a difference is the ball being deflected A1 jumps and controls the ball then lands in the backcourt - no violation per NCAAM.

That's not what happened here.

NCAA-M changed the rule a couple years ago. If there is a defensive touch then the offense can be the first to touch the ball in the backcourt even if they are the last to touch in the frontcourt. As described in the OP, a no-call is correct.

As described, I believe they got the rule correct:

From the NCAA rule book:

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 suggest that you brush up on your NCAAM’s rules.

Good idea - haven't looked at them in 5+ years (no need to) and don't see that changing.

Don't agree with the change, but oh well... good to know.

Local Gin Joint ...
 

In my forty years of officiating basketball, I've worked, one, and only one NCAA game, a women's junior college game assigned by my local high school assigner.

While I don't pay real close attention to NCAA rules, I don't ignore them completely either, especially when discussed here on the Forum.

Three reasons for me to be, at least, aware of NFHS/NCAA rule differences.

1) Prep school teams here in Connecticut use an odd hybrid version of NFHS/NCAA rules (shot clock, and a few other differences).

2) Being aware of NFHS/NCAA rule differences can help in a debate with a confused and bewildered high school coach (and maybe a partner) that doesn't know NFHS/NCAA rule differences.

3) And finally, being aware of NFHS/NCAA rule differences increases the chances of me winning bar bets on basketball rules at my local gin joint.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.A...=0&w=226&h=171

That is a BC violation. He is securing with FC status, then taking the ball to the BC. Players can only do that on a throw-in or jump ball, or when a defensive player steals a pass.

The play described in the OP is not a violation.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

For those who don’t officiate at the NCAA level, I would think that the best reason to be aware of recent NCAA rule changes is that the NFHS often follows suit. So watching a few tourney games on tv can provide one a preview of what is possibly coming to the HS level. My opinion is that the NFHS will adopt this defensive deflection change to the backcourt rule.

The Trickle Down Theory ...
 

Good point, but I prefer to wait until the NCAA rule officially trickles down to the NFHS.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.B...=0&w=251&h=176

Did they revise this memo?

February 20, 2019
Play 1 - Team A has possession of the ball in its front court when B1 deflects a pass in the direction
of the backcourt. A1 jumps in the air, controls the loose ball and then lands in the backcourt.
RULING - This is not a backcourt violation even though A1 touched the ball before it had gained
backcourt status. Legal play. Rules 9-12.5, 9-12.3.a and 9-12.4.

I think the best reason to know the NCAA rule on this specifically, is the fact that coaches and players often think the NF Rule is the same as what they see on TV. I treat these like football rules, "Coach that is the NCAA rule (or Saturday rule), not the rule at our level."

Peace

Yes,, you are correct. AR241 covers this play.

Wish they would update the rule wording to match the case play.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

This is a good reason, but I also like to have it in my bag of replies when a coach complains because he saw it on TV.

"Well, it happened in the State U. game the other night."
"Coach, their rule book allows for that exception. NFHS does not."

Good, Better, Best ...
 

Disagree. The best reason is this below:

Whether it's backcourt, goaltending, technical foul penalties, free thrower injured, etc., awareness of these differences allows officials to see where coaches are "coming from" and to quickly deescalate debates, preventing them from becoming arguments.

Also, one never knows when one will have a partner who's rules knowledge is mostly based on what he sees on television, or based on his mostly college schedule, and one should be prepared to "cut him off at the pass".

If the NFHS decides to switch to an existing NCAA rule, I can wait until the switch is actually made, no need (other than what I stated above) to "see it coming down the pike". When it gets in my high school games, it gets in my high school games. No real need to "jump the gun". Without a "head start", I can easily learn a new rule in the months between April and December.

Bottom line, for many reasons, high school basketball officials should, at least, be somewhat aware of NFHS/NCAA rule differences. No need to memorize the differences as would one who works both levels, but high school basketball officials should just be aware of some major differences.

Just be sure to not be confused by the differences. Now, where are my car keys?

I could not agree with you more on this point. Many times a coach starts they do not know the rule anyway and often are stumped if you tell them that is only a college rule. They usually have no counter for that because they know they did not read the rule for themselves, they heard Grant Hill talk about the rule and then believe that is how we should have applied the rule. People that are smart enough know when they are speaking from anecdotal evidence in the heat of the moment. They might not like it at the time but again my goal is not to get an agreement but to move on. If I have to keep explaining something we are often wasting time or not able to resolve the conversation.

Peace