Basket, Ring, Backboard ...

[ilyazhito]

It is not the same, because a ball hitting the backboard does not reset the shot clock. A ball hitting the ring does.
However, you have a point that IAABO screwed the pooch with #48. A ball hitting the ring is a try, therefore there is no team control when the ball hits the ring (in the frontcourt). Thus, because there is no team control, the ball can legally be touched by A in their backcourt after a try. Because the ball was recovered in the backcourt following a try, A gets a full reset of the shot clock and a new 10-second count.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... #48. A ball hitting the ring is a try, therefore there is no team control when the ball hits the ring (in the frontcourt) ...

Actually, according to 2021-22 NFHS Basketball Casebook 9.5 Situation, the ball hitting the backboard is a try.

2021-22 NFHS Basketball Casebook 9.5 Situation: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he/she throws the ball against: (a) the team’s own backboard; Ruling: Legal in (a); a team’s own backboard is considered a try for goal.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

It is not the same, because a ball hitting the backboard does not reset the shot clock. A ball hitting the ring does.
However, you have a point that IAABO screwed the pooch with #48. A ball hitting the ring is a try, therefore there is no team control when the ball hits the ring (in the frontcourt). Thus, because there is no team control, the ball can legally be touched by A in their backcourt after a try. Because the ball was recovered in the backcourt following a try, A gets a full reset of the shot clock and a new 10-second count.

Not correct. A pass which hits the ring is not a try. The official must deem that the player was throwing for goal. It is a judgment call.

[Nevadaref]

Billy,
Strictly speaking the ball contacting the ring/basket is not the same as the ball striking the backboard at either end of the court.

If the thrown ball is stated to be a pass in #48, then this must be a backcourt violation on a test. In practice the official on the court is going to deem this a try for goal and allow play to continue. The only NFHS rules support for this not being a backcourt violation is the casebook play which you have cited and the text of that states backboard. Also this is a pretty new case play ruling. That used to be a violation as well.

For question #7, IAABO is incorrect. There is no NfHS rule extant stating that it qualifies as a dribble for a thrown ball to strike the opponent’s basket. The rule clearly states backboard, so IAABO has no rules support for deeming this a violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Strictly speaking the ball contacting the ring/basket is not the same as the ball striking the backboard at either end of the court. If the thrown ball is stated to be a pass in #48, then this must be a backcourt violation on a test ... For question #7, IAABO is incorrect. There is no NFHS rule extant stating that it qualifies as a dribble for a thrown ball to strike the opponent’s basket. The rule clearly states backboard, so IAABO has no rules support for deeming this a violation.

Agree. Thanks Nevadaref. Well stated.

IAABO seems to have conflicting interpretations on these two questions. That is what confuses me.

[ilyazhito]

A ball hitting the backboard, absent player control being gained by the other team, does not reset . A ball hitting the ring will, if the official judges the ball hitting the ring to be a shot (which it usually is).