We went back and forth on this during an association meeting tonight. It's a test question, but I've forgotten which number (maybe 99?).

During a throw-in, A1 jumps from A's front court, catches the inbound pass, and passes it to A2 who is in A's back court before A1 touches the ground in back court.

Is this a back court violation?

Some said yes because he had front court status, got posession (and team control), then it was touched first in back court by a team mate.

Others argued no, that the exception about jumping to back court to catch a throw-in covered this case.

What is the right answer?

judgment call
 

BITS-

You are saying that there was possession, and therefore team control, when A1 caught the ball in the air...thus the front court status, and a backcourt violation occurs when A2 touches the ball first.

I've seen numerous plays where A1 would TIP the ball into the back court-this is legal, seeing that possession/team control has yet to occur.

It's #99 and it reads like this: "It is NOT a violation on a throw-in if A1 jumps from A's frontcourt and while airborne, catches the throw-in and then passes to A2, who is standing is A's backcourt."

The answer is false because A1 had front court status. So in other words, mega dittos to Matt S.!!

99 is False. It is a violation because the exception applies only to the airborne player. If he passes the ball to a teammate the exception no longer applies. The NFHS committee discussed changing this rule this summer but voted against it.
Below is the text of the proposed change which failed. It is clearly stated within it that it is illegal for an airborne player to pass the ball to a backcourt teammate.

4-35-4
New

Add new Article 4 that states “During a throw-in and during jump ball situations, the division line and frontcourt/backcourt status will not apply. This applies to an airborne player. Rationale: During throw-ins and jump balls, there should be no division line or back-court issues that officials should have to interpret. Current rules allow for defender A1 to intercept a throw-in in his/her frontcourt and land in their backcourt or pass (while airborne) to a teammate in their frontcourt without penalty, but current rules do not allow for A1 to pass the intercepted throw-in (while airborne) to a teammate in their backcourt. This interpretation or rule seems too technical in nature and this change would allow for a more accurately applied enforcement of a more easily understood rule.




[Edited by Nevadaref on Nov 3rd, 2004 at 05:10 AM]

I have already voted and I am getting ready to take our oldest son to school because it is raining (I know, I know, I told him that when I was in H.S. I walked to and from school everyday in 12" of snow, 5 mi uphill each way, but I digress) and then I have to go stand in the rain and hand out campaign literature for a friend who is running for county judge.

The preceding paragraph means that I do not have my rules books in front of me to give a rules or casebook/approved ruling reference.

The play in this post has to correct answers, depending upon whether the game is being played using NFHS or NCAA rules.

NFHS: Violation by Team A.

NCAA: Legal.

The best part is the the rule in both codes are the same word for word. But the rulings are spelled out in an NFHS Casebook Situation and a NCAA Approved Ruling.

MTD, Sr.

I want to make sure I understand this.

If A1 jumps from his/her frontcourt and catches the ball while airborne, then lands in backcourt, everything is o.k. because the exception of the ball coming from out of bounds on a throw in is applied. However, if the play occurs as stated in the question then the exception does not apply and we have a backcourt violation.

Whoa. 9-9-3..A player from the teasm not in control (e.g. during a throw -in), may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor, and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt."

I read this to mean that the airborne player who catches (secures control of the ball) and lands in backcourt, does NOT have front court status. Hence, if they don't have frontcourt status when they land, how can they have front court status in the air? Therefore, it cannot be a violation to pass it to someone still in the backcourt.

Frank, the airborne player does have frontcourt status. (Remember, you are where you were until you get where you're going) That's why this play used to be violation. The only reason it's not a violation now is that the rules committee simply made an exception for this particular situation.

The NCAA has added a rule making this (catch the throw in while airborne and pass to a teammate in the backcourt) illegal. See 9-12.7 Interestingly, as I read it, the new rule applies only on a jump ball and a throw-in. Apparently, a defensive player in the air can intercept a pass and pass the ball to the BC without it being a violation.

Bob:

This play is gettin more confusing as the thread goes on.

MTD, Sr.

That's true and has been true for years (in NCAA).

i think you guys are talking about two different plays, aren't you? The original play in this thread talked about a player of the same team as the in-bounder catching the ball in mid-air, which is what Chuck is describing. Frank is quoting from the book about a player of the opposite team from the player who is throwing in. They are two different situations.

Yes, but when they changed the rule, why did they change it for two excpetions and not the third?

I'm still not sure what the correct answer is and why. If the player had not passed the ball, but instead, had landed in backcourt then the play would have been legal the exception being that the player catching the ball on a throw in can land either in backcourt or frontcourt or land straddling the division line. Is the fact that he passed the ball to a teammate who is in backcourt the reason it is a violation as Matt S. states or is there another reason.

The pass is the reason. The four requirements are met in both cases. The rule provides an exception for the airborne player who catches an throw in. The rule does not provide an exception for the player to whom the airborne player then throws the ball.