Over and back call?

[JohnBark]

Team A has possession it's own FC. Player A1 passes the ball which is tipped by B1 in A's FC and then is tipped by A2 again who is in their FC. And then A2 recovers the tipped ball in the BC.

Is that over and back?

I called it over and back. Your thoughts?

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by JohnBark
Team A has possession it's own FC. Player A1 passes the ball which is tipped by B1 in A's FC and then is tipped by A2 again who is in their FC. And then A2 recovers the tipped ball in the BC.

Is that over and back?

I called it over and back. Your thoughts?

Yes,B1's tip did not end team control and team A was the last to touch FC and the first to touch BC.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by JohnBark
Team A has possession it's own FC. Player A1 passes the ball which is tipped by B1 in A's FC and then is tipped by A2 again who is in their FC. And then A2 recovers the tipped ball in the BC.

Is that over and back?

I called it over and back. Your thoughts?

If A is last to touch it in their FC and first to touch it after it goes to BC, it's a violation. Good call.

[Damian]

If Team A has the ball, Team B tips it, then it hits a Team A player and goes out of bounds, you determine that Team A is responsible for the ball going out of bounds. The same applies to backcourt.

If you have to explain it to a coach, I find that this explanation is easier for them to understand if they are not sure of the rules.

You can apply the same logic if a Team A player jumps from the FC over the division line and taps it back before it hits in the backcourt. Just like if he saved it from going out of bounds.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Damian
If Team A has the ball, Team B tips it, then it hits a Team A player and goes out of bounds, you determine that Team A is responsible for the ball going out of bounds. The same applies to backcourt.

If you have to explain it to a coach, I find that this explanation is easier for them to understand if they are not sure of the rules.

You can apply the same logic if a Team A player jumps from the FC over the division line and taps it back before it hits in the backcourt. Just like if he saved it from going out of bounds.

You can use that logic on the plays you noted, but it fails on: A1 from the BC passes the ball to the FC. The ball hits B1 in the DC and rebounds directly to A1, still in the BC without hitting the ground.

This is not a BC violation, but would be an OOB violation on A.

[Damian]

If A1 is performing a throw in and it hits B1, then hits A1 who is still out of bounds, A1 is considered to have caused the ball to go out of bounds.

[pauli]

4 points to this violation: 1) front court status; 2)team control; 3) last to touch the ball in the fc; and 4) first to touch in the bc. In your scenario, you have all 4=violation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by pauli
4 points to this violation: 1) front court status; 2)team control; 3) last to touch the ball in the fc; and 4) first to touch in the bc. In your scenario, you have all 4=violation.

Close, but not quite...

Team Control

Ball has had frontcourt status

Last to touch before it returned to the backcourt

First to touch after if returned to the backcourt

The difference is yours specifies where the ball is touched while mine specifies when the ball is touched relateive to where the ball is. It may seem insignificant but it is different.

Examples to illustrate the difference...

A1 in the backcourt, throws the ball towards A2. However, it hits the ref (who is in the frontcourt). The ball returns to A1 (or A3) who is in the backcourt. Violation even though A never touched the ball while it was in the frontcourt. They were the last to touch it before it returned to the backcourt.

A1 in a trap in the frontcourt at the division line. A1 throws a bounce pass across the court to A2. The bounce pass strikes the floor 4" behind the division line. A2 reaches over the line and catches it with both feet on the floor in front of the division line. Again, Violation. A1 was the last to touch before it hit the backcourt. A2 was the first to touch after it hit the backcourt. Yet no one touched it in the backcourt.

[Edited by Camron Rust on Oct 31st, 2004 at 12:11 PM]

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Damian
If A1 is performing a throw in and it hits B1, then hits A1 who is still out of bounds, A1 is considered to have caused the ball to go out of bounds.

Right, but if A1 is throwing from the BC and the ball hits B1 in the FC, then hits A1 who is still in the BC, it's not a backcourt violation.