Backcourt

[gostars]

A1 is backcourt. He passes to A2 who is in the frontcourt. A2 taps the ball back to A1 who is still backcourt. (A2 did not catch the ball, just tapped it) Violation?

[Grail]

Backcourt. A2 intentionally taps back to A1, thus has gained control of the ball in the frontcourt.

[BktBallRef]

Yes.

It's not necessary for there to be player control in FC, only that the ball attain FC status.

We need a quiz.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Nov 2nd, 2004 at 11:20 PM]

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Grail
Backcourt. A2 intentionally taps back to A1, thus has gained control of the ball in the frontcourt.

Actually, A2 doesn't gain player control unless he/she holds or dribbles the ball inbounds.

Also, intention has nothing to do with it---if A2 is in the front court, facing away from A1 and the ball bounces off his/her back, it's still a violation for A1 to retrieve the ball in the back court.

In fact, A2 doesn't even have to touch the ball. If A1 standing in the backcourt tosses the ball in the air with backspin. The ball bounces in the front court and rolls back to A3, who is in the back court. This is a violation. (It's not a violation if A1 retrieves the ball, since then this is A1's dribble, which means that the ball doesn't attain front court status until both of A1's feet and the ball touch the front court.)

Confused now?

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by Lotto

Actually, A2 doesn't gain player control unless he/she holds or dribbles the ball inbounds.

I believe he intended to type:
thus A has gained control of the ball in the frontcourt.

Originally posted by Lotto


In fact, A2 doesn't even have to touch the ball. If A1 standing in the backcourt tosses the ball in the air with backspin. The ball bounces in the front court and rolls back to A3, who is in the back court. This is a violation. (It's not a violation if A1 retrieves the ball, since then this is A1's dribble, which means that the ball doesn't attain front court status until both of A1's feet and the ball touch the front court.)

Confused now?

How do you reconcile your statement that I've highlighted in red with the following case book play:

BALL TOUCHES AN OFFICIAL
4.4.4 SITUATION: The official is in Team A' s frontcourt when he/she is contacted by a pass thrown by A1 from Team A' s backcourt. After touching the official, the ball: ...(b) rebounds to the backcourt where it is recovered by A2. Ruling: Touching the official is the same as touching the floor where the official is standing. ... In (b), the ball has been in the frontcourt and then has gone to the backcourt while in Team A' s control. It is a violation for A1 to cause the ball to go from A' s backcourt to frontcourt and return to backcourt untouched if A1 or a teammate is first to touch it after it has returned to backcourt. (9-9-2)

Looks like the NF does NOT consider an errant pass to be the start of a dribble if A1 recovers the ball since this case clearly says it is a backcourt violation.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
We need a quiz.

I agree. But who might be able to supply such a quiz?!?!

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

How do you reconcile your statement that I've highlighted in red with the following case book play:

The play that I gave had A1 throwing the ball with backspin. In my mind, I had an image of A1 starting a dribble with this move.

But you have a good point---there seems to be some judgement over whether A1 is starting a dribble or not when he/she throws the ball ahead of him/her.