The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 22, 2001, 01:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1
Cool

A1 is dribbling up the court just before the half-court line he attempts to
dribble behind his back. The ball stays behind him in the back court while
he continues into the front court. A1 stops, turns around and with both
feet in the front court, (the ball has bounced once in the backcourt).
A1 then gains control with both feet in the frontcourt but dribbles the
ball in the backcourt.

A1's dribble was clearly interrupted, is this a backcourt violation or does
the 3 point (two feet & ball) rule still apply ?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 22, 2001, 01:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally posted by jamie
A1 is dribbling up the court just before the half-court line he attempts to dribble behind his back. The ball stays behind him in the back court while he continues into the front court. A1 stops, turns around and with both
feet in the front court, (the ball has bounced once in the backcourt). A1 then gains control with both feet in the frontcourt but dribbles the ball in the backcourt.

A1's dribble was clearly interrupted, is this a backcourt violation or does the 3 point (two feet & ball) rule still apply ?
No, this is not a BC violation. You have one of two things here, depending on what actually occurred.

1- If you consider A1 to be in player control during the entire play, then all 3 points were never in the FC.

2- If you consider the dribble behind the back as an interrupted dribble, then the count would continue but the ball was never in the FC, therefore no violation.

Either way, the ball never attained FC status.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 22, 2001, 02:01pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally posted by jamie
A1 is dribbling up the court just before the half-court line he attempts to
dribble behind his back. The ball stays behind him in the back court while
he continues into the front court. A1 stops, turns around and with both
feet in the front court, (the ball has bounced once in the backcourt).
A1 then gains control with both feet in the frontcourt but dribbles the
ball in the backcourt.

A1's dribble was clearly interrupted, is this a backcourt violation or does
the 3 point (two feet & ball) rule still apply ?
Boy - if there ever was a rule I thought I was an expert on, it's the backcourt violation rule, but I've never seen this happen.

After reading BBR's post above, I guess I would have to agree that the ball never achieved frontcourt status, although I don't think this is the intent of the three points rule.

BTW - if he grabbed the ball after an interrupted dribble and then dribbled again (whether front or back court is irrelevant) - it's an illegal dribble violation. I guess your could just call that and not worry about the over and back. That would make your life easier

[Edited by Mark Padgett on Jan 22nd, 2001 at 01:10 PM]
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 22, 2001, 02:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 306
Oh I'll jump in and give it a shot. What you have is an interrupted dribble. Team control has never ended although player control has, by rule. (NFHS 4-12-1, 4-12-2, 4-15-5). Because of player control ending, A1 has front court status while the ball still has backcourt status. In my opinion, as soon as A1 touches the ball again, the ball gains front court status. A1 then re-establishes control and dribbles the ball in the backcourt. Once the ball touches A1 again after the first initial touching after the interrupted dribble, a backcourt violation occurs. If A1 merely touched the ball once and only once, you'd have nothing. It would be the same as if A2 had passed it from A's backcourt and it deflected off of A1 who was in A's frontcourt and went backcourt. Unless another A player is the first to touch it there, you have nothing. In this case, you had team control. The ball and the player had froncourt status (A1 touching the ball while A1's status was in the frontcourt gives the ball frontcourt status), A1 was the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt, first to touch the ball in the backcourt (the dribble of the ball re-established the ball's backcourt status (IMHO)). A weird play to be sure. Recognizing that player control ended on the interrupted dribble, to me is key.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 22, 2001, 02:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally posted by walter
Oh I'll jump in and give it a shot. What you have is an interrupted dribble. Team control has never ended although player control has, by rule. (NFHS 4-12-1, 4-12-2, 4-15-5). Because of player control ending, A1 has front court status while the ball still has backcourt status. In my opinion, as soon as A1 touches the ball again, the ball gains front court status. A1 then re-establishes control and dribbles the ball in the backcourt. Once the ball touches A1 again after the first initial touching after the interrupted dribble, a backcourt violation occurs.
I disagree. If he attempted to retrieve the ball and fumbled it, and then recovered, then you have a BC violation. But to just continue the dribble, as you describe, is not a violation. His dribble never stopped, it was just interrupted. Therefore, 4-4-6 still applies since the dribble never ceased.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 22, 2001, 03:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 306
I agree the dribble never ended. That being said, hear me out. It may be that we agree to disagree. A1 is no longer in control of the ball under 4-12-1 and 4-15-5. The ball has maintained backcourt status. A1, on the other hand, gained frontcourt status. Under 4-15-1, a dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control... When that control ended, under this scenario, unless A1 re-established himself in the backcourt and picked up the dribble again, you have a frontcourt player dribbling the ball in the backcourt. Player control ended when the dribble became interrupted. How is then any different than if you had A1 pass the ball from the backcourt. A1 in the frontcourt near the end line, instead of catching the ball bats the ball to the floor in the backcourt beginning a dribble. You immediately have a backcourt violation because A1 had frontcourt status and when the ball hit him, it had frontcourt status too. To me, this scenario is the same principle. A1's conrol ended the second the official ruled it an interrupted dribble (i.e. no player control of the ball although team control still exists). to me, A1 at that point becomes subject to the same rules, as far as backcourt/frontcourt go, as every one else on the floor does with respect to a ball with backcourt status. Agree? Disagree?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 22, 2001, 03:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Again, because the dribble never ended. Player control is of no consequence. The dribble was interrupted, not stopped. Therefore, the dribbler can continue the dribble no matter whether his feet are in the FC or BC since the ball never attained FC status. You're confusing player control with the end of the dribble. They are not one and the same. See 4-15-4 below.

4-15-4
The dribble ends when:
a. The dribbler catches or causes the ball to come to rest in one or both hands.
b. The dribbler palms/carries the ball by allowing it to come to rest in one or both hands.
c. The dribbler simultaneously touches the ball with both hands.
d. An opponent bats (intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s)) the ball.
e. The ball becomes dead.

In your comparison, A1 was never dribbling the ball in the BC. That is the difference.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 23, 2001, 10:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 378
Thumbs up

Those were my thoughts, precisely, BktBallRef--the dribble was interrupted, not ended. No violation. Good points re: having player control versus how a dribble ends.

Mark, I too feel like I have a good grasp of backcourt violation situations. Interestingly, though, there are so many different variations that can occur, that it is still easy to become confused. At our association meeting last night, I demonstrated a variety of situations in "real time" on the court (OK, maybe a tad slower than the "real" time in games we work), then asked each time if the play was legal or illegal. It struck me funny that the veteran officials almost never raised their hands to make a choice, as though not wanting to "risk" their reputations with an incorrect guess. In fact, many had no idea if what they saw was legal or not. I admit, though, I hadn't thought of Jamie's scenario, so didn't demonstrate and discuss that one.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 24, 2001, 04:09pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 298
Great Post!!! You are right when you noticed that many so called elite officials don't offer their opinions when confronted by certain situations-Doesn't that tell you something about your association???
__________________
Pistol
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 24, 2001, 11:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 122
Send a message via ICQ to moose69
Coming from a players perspective, I don't think PC ends when you go behind your back. Even a forword or post player such as myself can go behind the back in a controlled manner. I'd have to see it to call it, but i don't think you have a BC violation.

Tyler
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 24, 2001, 11:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 298
Thumbs up

Hey Moose 69 ,
You are absolutely right!
__________________
Pistol
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 25, 2001, 08:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 378
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Devana
You are right when you noticed that many so called elite officials don't offer their opinions when confronted by certain situations-Doesn't that tell you something about your association???
Ummm . . . I don't know, Peter. What does it seem to tell YOU about my association? (But be careful, 'cuz I'm on the Board and am Program Chairperson for the boys' season) (girls play in the fall here in Mich.).
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1