Just Touch The Division Line ...

[BillyMac]

... not step over the division line into the backcourt.

I believe that we have already discussed this on the Forum.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

To me, this sounds like after a backcourt violation, the ball will be put in play at the spot closest to where the violation occurred, rather than one of the 4 pre-determined spots. The violation is committed by the offense (not the defense) in the offensive team's backcourt (not the frontcourt).

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While the division line is in the backcourt for the team that stepped on it, it is also in the backcourt of the team getting the ball. So, the new offensive team is still getting that ball in their own backcourt. Thus, it stays at the line. But, that argument is only clear if they step only on the painted line itself an not over the line. If they step entirely past the line, that does put them into the other teams frontcourt ...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Hopefully the NFHS will clarify all the many questions broached in this thread with more precise rule language and interpretations ...

A recent issue of IAABO Sportorials magazine listed this as an NFHS Update and Interpretation.

Backcourt Situations:

Play 1: Team A has control of the ball in the frontcourt when A-1 while holding the ball steps on the division line causing a backcourt violation. Based on a decision NFHS Rules Editor Lindsey Atkinson has made this week, the ball will be awarded to Team B at the nearest 28-foot markin Team B’s frontcourt. It should be noted that this interpretation is different from the interpretation in both NCAA Men and Women’s rules. Under NCAA rules, the ball is awarded to Team B at the division line for this specificbackcourt violation.

Play 2: A-1 has control of the ball in the frontcourt and throws a pass that hits the division line and then is caught by A-2 standing in Team A’s frontcourt. Since A-2 was in Team A’s frontcourt when the violation occurred, Team B will be awarded the ball for a backcourt throw-in nearest to where the violation occurred

[JRutledge]

I am not quoting the rule right now, but every BCV goes to the 28-foot mark. It says that in the penalty portion of the rule. If you are touching the division line, the division line is in the backcourt, so you put the new throw-in at the 28-foot mark.

The NCAA has a different interpretation because they also have different considerations like the shot clock and reset situations that the NF does not have across the board at this time.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not quoting the rule right now, but every BCV goes to the 28-foot mark. It says that in the penalty portion of the rule.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Thanks for the rule citation JRutledge.

[Raymond]

Yeah, I pointed it out a few months ago that this play needed an explicit interpretation because it is different from the college rule.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not quoting the rule right now, but every BCV goes to the 28-foot mark. It says that in the penalty portion of the rule. If you are touching the division line, the division line is in the backcourt, so you put the new throw-in at the 28-foot mark.

The NCAA has a different interpretation because they also have different considerations like the shot clock and reset situations that the NF does not have across the board at this time.

Peace

I don't like that interpretation for one reason. The division line is in the backcourt of the team getting the ball. That should, logically, make the throwin in the backcourt (at the division line) of the team getting the ball. But, of course, you have to go by the NFHS's interpretation regardless of whether it is logical or not.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't like that interpretation for one reason. The division line is in the backcourt of the team getting the ball. That should, logically, make the throwin in the backcourt (at the division line) of the team getting the ball. But, of course, you have to go by the NFHS's interpretation regardless of whether it is logical or not.

What specific interpretation are you talking about? You think the ball should be at the division line (NF)?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What specific interpretation are you talking about? You think the ball should be at the division line (NF)?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While the division line is in the backcourt for the team that stepped on it, it is also in the backcourt of the team getting the ball. So, the new offensive team is still getting that ball in their own backcourt. Thus, it stays at the line. But, that argument is only clear if they step only on the painted line itself an not over the line. If they step entirely past the line, that does put them into the other teams frontcourt ...

While the "just touching the division line" for a backcourt violation 9-9 PENALTY makes it perfectly clear to inbound the ball at one of the "four special spots", the penalty does not match the "four special spots" rule language as written.

7-5-2 thru 4: Establishes four throw-in spots (the nearest 28-foot mark along each sideline or the nearest spot 3-feet outside the lane line on the end line) when a team gains or retains possession in their frontcourt after the opponent commits a violation, a common foul prior to the bonus, or the ball becomes dead (i.e. inadvertent whistle or a held ball).

Being deemed backcourt by only stepping on the painted division line (and not over the line) probably should have been listed as an "exception" to the rule.

[JamesBCrazy]

I live in the mystical land of IAABO so I'll side with them over the NFHS rulebook, a change which was likely made in error (possibly based on the "BCV throw-ins are at the division line" myth.)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

While the "just touching the division line" for a backcourt violation 9-9 PENALTY makes it perfectly clear to inbound the ball at one of the "four special spots", the penalty does not match the "four special spots" rule language as written.

7-5-2 thru 4: Establishes four throw-in spots (the nearest 28-foot mark along each sideline or the nearest spot 3-feet outside the lane line on the end line) when a team gains or retains possession in their frontcourt after the opponent commits a violation, a common foul prior to the bonus, or the ball becomes dead (i.e. inadvertent whistle or a held ball).

Being deemed backcourt by only stepping on the painted division line (and not over the line) probably should have been listed as an "exception" to the rule.

The division line by rule is considered the BC by rule already. That is why when you dribble the ball from the BC to the FC, you have to completely cross the division line to retain FC status. So not sure why this is such an issue, when by rule that is clearly the case in ten-second counts and calling a BCV. So it only makes sense that you would rule this as one of the 4 spots (specifically the 28-foot marks).

Even when they put this rule in college, we would put the ball at the 28-foot mark when this rule was first put in. It was only later that the NCAA wanted this at the division line and wanted a full reset on the shot clock. But before it was understood to put that violation in the FC (the rule is basically the same).

I do not know why there needs to be an exception when you have clearly violated in the BC just like you committing a traveling violation without crossing the division line too. What is the difference?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JamesBCrazy

I live in the mystical land of IAABO so I'll side with them over the NFHS rulebook, a change which was likely made in error (possibly based on the "BCV throw-ins are at the division line" myth.)

JamesBCrazy:

Yes, it was a myth.

With the new "four special spots" rule, I have to remove this section (below) from my List of Misunderstood Basketball Rules.

After a violation, the ball is awarded to the opponents for a throwin from an out of bounds spot nearest the violation. This is especially true for a backcourt violation, where the ball may not necessarily be put in play at the division line, but, rather, is always put back in play at the spot nearest the violation.

Also a myth that a three second violation goes to the point of interruption, rather it goes to the closest spot to the violation (in the lane).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not know why there needs to be an exception ...

There doesn't, the 9-9 backcourt PENALTY language makes it perfectly clear.

But the rule language listed in 7-5-2 thru 4 (without the additional penalty language), could lead one to believe that the "new" throwin, after opponents stepping "on" (not "over") the division line, would be at the division line (the closest spot), with the division line being in the backcourt of the "new" throwin team, thus a backcourt throwin and not eligible for one of the new "four special spots" (no matter which way a team is going, the division line is always in the backcourt of both teams).

7-5-2 thru 4: Establishes four throw-in spots (the nearest 28-foot mark along each sideline or the nearest spot 3-feet outside the lane line on the end line) when a team gains or retains possession in their frontcourt after the opponent commits a violation, a common foul prior to the bonus, or the ball becomes dead (i.e. inadvertent whistle or a held ball).

Let me put it this way.

In the olden days (before the "four special spots" rule) where would one administer the throwin for a team that simply steps "on" (not "over") the division line? At the division line.

For the new throwin team, is the division line in the new throwin team's frontcourt, in their backcourt? Their backcourt.

Flash forward to the new "four special spots" rule. Where do teams that have throwins in their backcourt make their throwins, at the closest spot, or at one of the new "four special spots"? At the closest spot.

But it's all academic because the 9-9 backcourt PENALTY language makes it perfectly clear.

All backcourt violations are administered at one of the new "four special spots", even after players step "on" (not "over") the division line.

[JRutledge]

Let me make something rather clear. I had to get clarification for this when I was giving two different presentations on the issue. I asked this summer before the rulebooks came out to wonder what we were doing with plays where we stepped on the division line. But the rule was not completely out, just the change to the 4 spots. When you read the rule, the rule says all BCVs are at one of the 4 spots. But at other levels that is not so much the case. So it needed to be clarified for sure. Again the BC is the division line. So it only makes logical sense we would not change that for this newer rule. And I mostly needed clarification because this was an NCAA rule coming to the NF. I know why they did what they did there, so I wanted to make sure it was not a conflict when I worked a HS game.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Let me make something rather clear. I had to get clarification for this when I was giving two different presentations on the issue. I asked this summer before the rulebooks came out to wonder what we were doing with plays where we stepped on the division line. But the rule was not completely out, just the change to the 4 spots.

Agree.

Not only JRutledge, but Scrapper1, Raymond, Camron Rust, and I had similar questions.

Fortunately, and thankfully, the publication of the 9-9 backcourt PENALTY language (first posted on the Forum by JRutledge) made this situation crystal clear and, thus, made our questions moot.

Bottom line: All backcourt violations are administered at one of the new "four special spots", even after players step only "on" (not "over") the division line.

Easy peasey lemon squeezy.