I believe this to be a backcourt violation. (I think!! ;-) talk about sitting on the fence!!)

The ball has frontcourt status, and A2 has backcourt status. Is it not the same prinicple as inbounds/out of bounds. In the same scenario, if B1 batted the ball toward a boundry line, and A2 ran out of bounds and caught the ball in the air, A2 caused it to be out of bounds. In the backcourt scenario, isn't A2 causing the ball to obtain backcourt status by touching it? If he lets it bounce first, then B1 has caused the ball to go backcourt.
If A2 lets the ball bounce (backcourt or out of bounds) prior to touching, he's OK in both cases.

Similiar situation during a throw-in. A1, from out of bounds makes a throw-in that B1 deflects right back at A1. If A1 touches the ball while still out of bounds, violation on A, ball to B. If he lets it hit the ground first, ball back to Team A.

Hey, I could be wrong. My first inclination was that it was NOT a violation.

DK, very WishyWashy at Work....

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark Padgett on 11-10-1999 01:01 AM

First of all, why would you start a 10 count when you say it is a backcourt violation?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mark, I believe he was saying to remember to start a 10-second count IF A2 has the presence of mind to let the ball touch the floor FIRST, before picking it up.

Of course, we know that we start the 10-second count when the ball has backcourt status, and NOT when a player of team A picks up the ball. There IS a difference, as noted by someone below. (i.e. a ball rolling slowly in the backcourt, players hesitant to pick it up -- your count should be going!!)

dk

The ball has frontcourt status, and A2 has backcourt status.

Yes...

Is it not the same prinicple as inbounds/out of bounds.

There's a subtle difference. For OOB it is a violation to <u>cause</u> the ball to go OOB. (9-3)

For backcourt, it is a violation if Team A "last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt." (9-9)

While it is true that A2 <u>caused</u> the ball to go into the backcourt, A2 was not the last person to touch the ball <u>in the frontcourt</u>.

Therefore, no violation.

[This message has been edited by ken roberts (edited November 11, 1999).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>[b] Therefore, no violation. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I knew I shoulda stuck with my gut reaction...

BTW, didn't the original post state that the IAABO test key said this WAS a violation?

IAABO & NFHS must use the same researchers/fact checkers for their tests!!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark Padgett on 11-10-1999 01:01 AM

First of all, why would you start a 10 count when you say it is a backcourt violation?

Second, it is my opinion that A2 cannot be both the last to touch in the frontcourt and the first to touch in the backcourt on the same touch. If, when B1 touched the ball, that was the last touch in the frontcourt, then there's no over and back no matter what. If, when A2 touched the ball, that was considered the last touch in the frontcourt because the ball bounced in the frontcourt prior to A2 touching it, then that same touch by A2 cannot also be the first touch in the backcourt. A2 only touched the ball once, it must be one or the other, not both.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark Padgett on 11-10-1999 01:01 AM

First of all, why would you start a 10 count when you say it is a backcourt violation?

Second, it is my opinion that A2 cannot be both the last to touch in the frontcourt and the first to touch in the backcourt on the same touch. If, when B1 touched the ball, that was the last touch in the frontcourt, then there's no over and back no matter what. If, when A2 touched the ball, that was considered the last touch in the frontcourt because the ball bounced in the frontcourt prior to A2 touching it, then that same touch by A2 cannot also be the first touch in the backcourt. A2 only touched the ball once, it must be one or the other, not both.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please read my answer closely. I didn't say start a 10-second count after a violation. I said to start the count after A-2 made the smart play and let the ball bounce in the backcourt.

I agree with Mr. Pilo in this sense:

When Team A enters the frontcourt, imagine in your mind that there IS NO BACKCOURT AT ALL, and the division line is out of bounds.

Now, think as if this same scenario happened near an end-line. If A-2 caught the ball before the ball struck out-of-bounds, the ball would be last touched by Team A, and Team B would be awarded the ball out of bounds.

In that same sense, think about that as if it were deflected into the backcourt. The backcourt is really considered out-of-bounds territory for Team A until it is touched by Team B and the ball STRIKES THE FLOOR.

If A-2 were to catch the ball before the ball strikes the backcourt.... My Call:

Backcourt Violation: Team B's ball.

Just what I think.

=================================
Zachary "Chunk" McCrite
Indiana High School Official

Zachary --

Read Ken Robert's posting on this about three posts up. He explains the subtle difference between out-of-bounds and backcourt.

Yes, B1 was the last to touch the ball. However, he caused it to bounce high into the air and the ball had frontcourt status. When A2 caught the ball in the backcourt he had backcourt status and therefore he was the person causing the ball to go into the backcourt.

Remember! When answering questions on basketball only use one rule. Do not bring other situations into the play.

Also, each year only 20-25 questions are changed on the Federation test. So review last years test and the new rules changes for this year and you will do fine on the test.