Big Dog D1 Women's Official and Great Interpretator of the rules brought up this case play at camp:

A1 is caught in a trap in the front court right next to the backcourt line. He passes to A2 who is also in the frontcourt next to the backcourt line on the opposite side of A1. In order to get the ball to A2, A1 throws a bounce pass that hits in the backcourt and because of its spin bounces to A2 who grabs it. A2 grabs it without going into the backcourt.

What do you call, NCAA or NFHS, and what rule or definition are you using to back it up?

We've been over this one several times before. However, it's a good one to demonstrate the backcourt violation rule. I'll hold off on providing my answer while giving others that haven't seen it before a chance to think about it.

Expanding it to all possible combinations (some should be obvious to all, some may not be):

<TABLE BORDER=1 CELLPADDING=2 CELLSPACING=2 BGCOLOR=#CCAACC> <TR> <TH>Player A1 Location</TH> <TH>Player A2 Location</TH> <TH>Ball Bounce Location</TH> <TH>Backcourt violation???</TH> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=4>Frontcourt</TD> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Backcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=4>Backcourt</TD> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Backcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>?</TD> </TR> </TABLE>


[Edited by Camron Rust on Jul 27th, 2004 at 09:14 PM]

Ball is in the backcourt until it touches something in the frontcourt.

My instinct would be to call a back court violation.

You're leaving an awful lot to assumption.

Violation in NFHS. No exact case play that I know of. The ball was in control of Team A, and a player of Team A was the last to touch the ball in FC and a player of Team A was the first to touch it after it returned to the back court.

Z

What? It was a bounce pass (as the original case) from one player to another. That's about all that is needed as far as I can think of.

Backcourt violation: Fed rule 9-9-1

Careful here, the highlighted part above is not accurate. It's correct but not complete.

Sorry, I figured your chart was for the general case, not the play under discussion. I should have realized.

Anyway, nice table.

NFHS...

I believe it is a backcourt. Rule 9-9-1 says "A player shall not...be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt."

In this play, a team A player was the last to touch after team control was established in the front court...and the first to touch after the ball went to the backcourt. There is nothing in the rule that says the other team A player has to be in the backcourt to violate.

The D1 official told us this situation was brought up at a NCAA meeting. Supposedly the officials at the meeting were split on whether or not to call this a backcourt violation.

When I asked him what he would call, he said he would not call it a backcourt violation. He stated that he could not find anything in the NCAA literature to justify a backcourt violation call.

Really???

That must be because he is using Billy Packer's rules book.

NCAA A.R. 19 under 9-11-1 explicitly covers this play and clearly states that it is a backcourt violation.

PS I like the chart, Camron.

The higher level you work, the less time you have to read the rules. :eek:

Z

another variable
 

my first instinct was to call it a violation but would waited to see who touched it first...in this case A2. Now a DIFFERENT situation...we can agree that if A1 is in the FC and passes the ball to A2 who takes the pass in the air from the BC and lands in the FC that this would be a BC violation...now for the twist. What would the call be, on the previous play, if the ball bounced back in the FC before A2 touched it? Would FC status be reestablished?

Re: another variable
 

WARNING: The following post is specific to this senario. Don't read too much into it.

Frontcourt status for the ball would be reestablished, but it is still a backcourt violation. It does not matter where the ball goes after entering the backcourt. Nor does it matter where the player is standing when he touches it. All that matters is WHO touches the ball first after it has been in the backcourt.

\
 

WARNING: The following post is specific to this <font color = red>senario</font>. Don't read too much into it.

[/B][/QUOTE]Nevada, I dont want to be pedantic (cynical is OK), but you might like to start passing your time by learning how to spell properly. The word that you intended to use for this thread is "scenario", not "senario".
Here is the proper spelling:

Main Entry- SCENARIO
- pronunciation- "sce-nar-i-o"
- meaning- "an ouline of the plot of a dramatic or literary work".

Happy to be of assistance. :D

Re: another variable
 

Since FC had already been established, and was followed by the ball establishing BC status, it is a violation for anyone on team A to be the first to touch it. Even if the ball rolls all the way to A's basket.

Re: \
 

Nevada, I dont want to be pedantic (cynical is OK), but you might like to start passing your time by learning how to spell properly. The word that you intended to use for this thread is "scenario", not "senario".
Here is the proper spelling:

Main Entry- SCENARIO
- pronunciation- "sce-nar-i-o"
- meaning- "an ouline of the plot of a dramatic or literary work".

Happy to be of assistance. :D [/B][/QUOTE]


"For 'tis the sport to have the engineer
Hoist with his own petard: and 't shall go hard
But I will delve one yard below their mines,
And blow them at the moon: O, 'tis most sweet,
When in one line two crafts directly meet."

From Hamlet by W. Shakespeare

Filling in the chart...

Expanding it to all possible combinations (some should be obvious to all, some may not be):

<TABLE BORDER=1 CELLPADDING=2 CELLSPACING=2 BGCOLOR=#CCAACC> <TR> <TH>Player A1 Location</TH> <TH>Player A2 Location</TH> <TH>Ball Bounce Location</TH> <TH>Backcourt violation???</TH> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=4>Frontcourt</TD> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>No</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>Yes</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Backcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>Yes</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>Yes</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=4>Backcourt</TD> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>No</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>No</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD ROWSPAN=2>Backcourt</TD> <TD>Frontcourt</TD> <TD>Yes</TD> </TR> <TR> <TD>Backcourt</TD> <TD>No</TD> </TR> </TABLE>

Camron, great chart. Just trying to understand how it is a BC violation if both players are in the backcourt and the ball bounces in the frontcourt. Isn't it true that front court has not been established yet since the ball has not been touched by any player on team A LOCATED IN THE FRONTCOURT? I profess that I don't know everything.........

The ball attains front court status when it touches the frontcourt. You don't need a player in the frontcourt to touch the ball.

Look up the definition of front court/back court in rule 4, and the wording of the violation in rule 9.

:cool:

[Edited by ref18 on Jul 28th, 2004 at 09:48 PM]

You don't need player control in the front court. You only need team control plus the ball having front court status.

Sorry about that, you are right,

Rule 9(9)2

A player shall not:
While in team control in its backourt, cause the ball to go from backcourt to frountcourt and return to backcourt, withouth the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, and be the first to touch it in the backcourt.

Maybe I should try to read the book before I post :)

The location of the ball that is not being held or dribbled is where ever it last touched the floor or player.


The critera for a backcourt violation are:
1. Team control
2. Ball has had front court status
3. Team A was the last to touch before it returned to the backcourt.
4. Team A is the first to touch the ball after it returned to the backcourt.

So, the ball gains FC status the moment it bounces in the FC. When A2 catches it in the backcourt. He causes it to be in the backcourt. A1 was the last to touch the ball before it returned to the backcourt (even though it briefly had FC status after A1 released the ball). A2 was the first to touch the ball after it returned to the backcourt.

Thanks for the explanation Lotto. Like I said I am not omniscient, especially when it come to backcourt violations. This is a tricky subject.

Okay, so which is it? Can't be both!

Editted to add: Should have finished reading before I posted this. Touching the floor confers status, so Snaq is wrong about the ball rolling to the basket. Right?

[Edited by rainmaker on Jul 28th, 2004 at 11:01 PM]

fc status
 

always thought that the ball and both feet must be over the division line before fc status is established, not just the ball...any comments would be welcomed...im reading from the previous posts that if just the ball is dribbled over the d/line and then dribbled back into the bc this constitutes a violation?

Re: fc status
 

This is only true for a player dribbling form the back court into the front court. In all other cases, the ball has front court status as soon as it touches something (or someone) who is in the front court.

Re: Re: fc status
 

Well, actually it is true for a player(s) advancing the ball from the backcourt to the frontcourt. A1 in backcourt passes to A2 with one foot in backcourt and one foot in frontcourt. A2 is still in backcourt until both feet and ball are in frontcourt. Agreed?

Juulie,
The play I'm seeing (in my head, an admittedly odd breeding ground for hypotheticals) takes place thusly:

A1 with ball, not dribbling, standing in FC near division line. (FC established)


Throws a bounce pass to A2 so that it bounces in the BC (back court now established) before getting to A2 (standing in the FC and not setting foot in the BC). More specifically, the ball bounces twice; once in the BC and the second time in the FC (not an overly difficult trick). If anyone from A is the first to touch the ball after it bounces in the BC, it is a violation, no matter how far from the Division line the ball gets.

Am I missing something in the rules that says this isn't a violation?

Well, first of all, I'm really, really confused about the play you've just described. If the ball bounces twice, once in BC and then in FC, did the someone from team A who touched just tap it, and then it bounced in FC? Or what? What's the order of events here?

But secondly, in your original post you said the ball ROLLED from BC to the basket. That's not the same at all as bouncing once in the BC and then flying up over the FC. If the ball bounces, and is proceeding through the air, then it's still a BC ball, no matter how far over the FC it moves. But in the original post you said ROLLED, so I'm thinking that it's touching the floor at least 90% of the time between the division line and the basket.

So you clarify first, and then I will!

Sorry, can't agree. The three points rule (both feet and the ball) ONLY applies to a dribbler. A player who is standing and holding the ball does not get the same treatment.

So in your example above A2 would have backcourt status when he catches the pass and no violation should be called. However, he does not have to touch both feet and the ball in the front court in order to have frontcourt status.
Two examples:
1. A2 from your play, now lifts his foot that was in the backcourt into the air and puts it back down in the same spot.
Ruling: This is a backcourt violation. When A2 is no longer touching the backcourt he attains frontcourt status. Since he is holding the ball, the ball also attains frontcourt status. When A2 puts his foot back down in the backcourt, he attains backcourt status, thus committing a violation.
2. A2 from you play, fumbles the ball and it bounces once on the floor in the frontcourt. Without moving either of his feet he reaches over and grabs the ball.
Ruling: This is a backcourt violation. A2 is not a dribbler since he fumbled the ball. A2 does not have player control during the fumble and a dribble must be conducted with player control. Therefore, the three points rule does not apply here. When the ball hits the floor in the frontcourt, it attains frontcourt status with Team A still in control. The fumble only ended player control, not team control. When A2 grabs the ball again, he has backcourt status because he has one foot in the backcourt. This causes a violation.

Of course, if A2 from your play were to start a dribble, then both feet and the ball would have to touch in the frontcourt for backcourt status to be lost.
So going back to my example #1 and contrasting it with A2 dribbling the ball instead of holding the ball, we get: A2 receives a pass from A1 while straddling the division line, he now starts a dribble, he then lifts his foot from the backcourt, while continuing to dribble, and puts it back down in the same location. This is not a violation, since this foot never touched in the frontcourt. A2 is considered to have backcourt status the entire time.

[Edited by Nevadaref on Jul 29th, 2004 at 02:52 AM]

spelling
 

"For 'tis the sport to have the engineer
Hoist with his own petard: and 't shall go hard
But I will delve one yard below their mines,
And blow them at the moon: O, 'tis most sweet,
When in one line two crafts directly meet."

From Hamlet by W. Shakespeare
[/B][/QUOTE]

JR, thanks for catching that spelling error. But I was using the word in a different meaning.

I was after: a sequence of events especially when imagined; especially : an account or synopsis of a possible course of action or events

And I told you that Dan would start quoting Shakespeare! :)

Although, since I said Horatio, he purposely picked lines by Hamlet. And check out the etymology of this word from the quote! Dan you old fart! :)

Main Entry: pe·tard
Pronunciation: p&-'tär(d)
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, from peter to break wind, from pet expulsion of intestinal gas, from Latin peditum, from neuter of peditus, past participle of pedere to break wind; akin to Greek bdein to break wind
1 : a case containing an explosive to break down a door or gate or breach a wall
2 : a firework that explodes with a loud report

[Edited by Nevadaref on Jul 29th, 2004 at 03:22 AM]

Re: Re: Re: fc status
 

I agree that A2 is in the back court in this situation, but that has to do with "location of a player" (there's a definition of this in NCAA rule 4-43). The "three point" rule that was brought up (need both feet and ball in front court) has to do with ball status, and applies only to a dribbling player (see NCAA rule 4-28.3c).

Juulie, they are describing a pass with sidespin applied so that the ball bounces in the backcourt with enough spin that it changes direction toward the front court. Of course, to make it roll all the way back to the basket would take a lot of English.

BTW I notice that in FIBA rules, throwing the ball in the backcourt is itself a violation. That makes the call a little more obvious.

Let me try one more time, in chronological order.

1. Player A, standing in FC not dribbling, throws a bounce pass that bounces in the BC.

2. On the pass, the spin on the ball causes it to change direction and bounce back into the front court.

3. After the ball bounces at least one time in the FC, A2 is the first to touch it.

4. Referee whistles a violation.

It doesn't matter how far the ball moves from the line, or how many times it touches the floor in the FC.

When I said "rolls to the basket," I should have said "bounced." I was thinking "rolls" because after a few bounces, the ball is going to begin rolling. In practice, this will never happen because someone is going to pick it up before it gets to that point.

Adam, thanks for clarifying. Now I understand your point.

Anyone else -- Is this true?!?! I never got this memo.

W O W

This is absolutely true. None of the backcourt rule specifies where the ball can or can not be touched...only when it can't not be touch relative to where the ball has been or is going...<b>last to touch before returning to the backcourt</b> and <b>first to touch after going to the backcourt</b>. Those are the key elements. The first to touch after it went to the backcourt could be anywhere on the floor.

A backcourt violation is akin to being OOB except that it is delayed and only applies if team A is the first to touch it after it goes to the backcourt.

[Edited by Camron Rust on Jul 29th, 2004 at 11:40 AM]

Camron, other than the part about "when it can't not be touch", this is very helpful. But geez, how many total human beings -- including all players, coaches, refs and fans -- are going to get this right in a game? I'm betting it's less than 100. And how could anyone ever explain it!"!?!? It's way too confusing.

Camron, I don't find this helpful at all. It's not the same at all, even with an exception for the delay. On an oob the ball achieves oob status as soon as it touches the floor, but in the case of the bc, it effectively retains bc status no matter where it gets to in the fc. That's too far apart to use as a comparison.

According to 2003 NCAA rules, it is not a violation because A2 is not "in his back court", is that right?

Section 11. Ball in Back Court
Art. 1. A player shall not be the first to touch the ball **in his or her back court**
when the ball came from the front court while the player’s team was in
team control and the player or a teammate caused the ball to go into the
back court.

**in his or her back court** refers to the ball, not the player.

Wow. I thought I got it right this time. but is it because of me or the wording does seem ambiguous?

What is the intention of the back court violation anyway? to make game tempo faster? this bounce pass does not seem to violate any basketball "spirit" to me.

Thanks.

:) I know the feeling.

I agree, the rules sometimes could be worded better.

I can see your argument about how this play might not be exactly within the *spirit* of the rules, but it's still a consequence of the rules.

Maybe these oddball plays happen so rarely it's not worth writing down all the possible exceptions.

Who knows?

I disagree. The purpose of the 10 second rule is to speed the game up. The purpose of the backcourt rule seems to be to provide a shorter playing court for the offense to work with. In that light, the bounce pass in question does violate the spirit of the rules in that it is an attempt to expand the legal offensive playing court.

Well, here's a situation that I'm proud to say I got right.

A1 is dribbling in her front court. B1 knocks the ball away towards the back court. A1 chases after it, diving, and tries to start a dribble from the floor. The ball's last bounce before A1 touches it is in the front court. Then A1 starts her dribble, the first bounce of the dribble is in the back court. When the ball came back and touched A1's hand---TWEET! Back court violation.

(Note that the "three points" idea discussed earlier doesn't apply, 'cause A1 is not advancing the ball from the back court to the front court while dribbling.)

I was being observered by our board interpreter, and he gave me two pats on the back for that one. :D

when A1 first touched the ball, did the ball break the mid-court line already? Who caused the ball to go to back court? B2 or A1?

If it was B2 and the ball was in back court already before A1 touched it, then A1's action should be legal, right?

YSONG,
The ball's last bounce before A1 touched it was in the FC, then she gets control in the back court. By rule, the one who causes the ball to go into the BC is the last to touch it in the FC.

By rule, the one who causes the ball to go into the BC is the last to touch it before it goes into the backcourt. It doesn't matter where they are when they touch it.

Poor grammer indeed. Let me try again:

The backcourt rule does not specify anything about where the ball can or can not be touched.

The backcourt rule only specifies when it is illegal to touch the ball: Team A can't be the first to touch a ball that is under team control, has been in the front court, returned to the backcourt if they were the last to touch the ball before it returned to the backcourt.

Maybe that's better....maybe not. It's not any easy rule to put into words.

No, it's not easy!! This attempt is much better. Now that this is clarified for me, I can see what the wording in the book means, but would never have derived that meaning from the book.

And frankly, I can't imagine calling it. The explanation sounds laughable. I guess I'll have to just hope it never happens.

Maybe it's time to once again post the back court violation quiz that shows up here every once in a while. Anyone have it handy?

The "four criteria" always seemed pretty clear to me:

1) Team control by A
2) Ball in front-copurt
3) A last to touch before ball goes to back court
4) A first to touch after ball goes to back court.

(Note that point 4 DOES NOT say "A frist to touch IN back court.")

After B2 knocks the ball off, there is no player control at that time. so the FC/BC status of the ball is decided by its location, i,e, which floor or air space it is in at that time.

so if the ball is in BC air space already before A1 touches it, then A1 is not the one who causes the ball go to BC. so there is no violation. (assuming A1 has not touched the ball yet after B2's last touch.) Does this rationale make sense?

Thanks.

Coupla things:

- PLAYER control is not relevant, TEAM control is (see Bob's post)

- Where the ball is in the air is irrelevant. Ball & player FC/BC status is defined by where last touched. IOO the ball remain in the FC until it touches the floor in the BC.

It makes sense, but as worded, it is wrong. It doesn't matter where the ball is in relation to air space. The FC/BC status of the ball is determined by where it last touched the floor or a player. So, if B2 tips the ball toward the backcourt line and A1 taps it before the ball hits the floor in the BC, then A1 is responsible for the ball going into the backcourt (assuming it goes to the BC).

Airspace is only relevant in international relations (unless you own property near an airport.)

Thanks, Dan_ref. You are right. It seems like there is another differece between NCAA rule and NBA rule.

In NCAA,
"A ball that is not in contact with a player or the playing court retains the same status as when it was last in contact with a player or the playing court."

While in NBA,
"The ball is considered in the frontcourt once it has broken the plane of the midcourt line and is not in player control. "

Thanks for clearing this up for me.

That definition sums it up for me right there...backcourt violation!;)

I think it would be hard to justify logically within the spirit of the rules using the backcourt to your advantage, even if it weren't specifically stated in the rules. A bounce in the backcourt to get from one offensive frontcourt player to another frontcourt offensive player should be a violation because A caused the ball to go backcourt, and then was the first to touch it.

It took you guys two and a half years to come up with those responses? :rolleyes:

LOL. Cut 'em some slack. They're both new to the forum. They probably did a couple of searches or found old links at the bottom of other threads. Might not even have realized it was that old. I have to admit, though, that I did wonder how this "new" thread generated 5 pages since this morning. :confused:

sorry fellas, it came up under a "similar thread" at the bottom of my post about the SEC camp. My bad...;)

It's like "Thread Cemetary" in here tonight. All sorts of dead threads coming back to haunt us.