Correct backcourt call?

[ranjo]

This is what happened in a V-Boys scrimmage yesterday.

After a made basket, Blue inbounds and is advancing the ball from backcourt toward frontcourt under defensive pressure. Blue 1 passes to Blue 2 who dribbles toward the division line, is trapped by two red players, and picks up the ball with one foot in frontcourt and the other in the air. He then passes back to Blue 3 who is airborn from backcourt to front court. I call a backcourt violation, the justification being Blue 2 established himself front court when he picked up the ball with one foot frontcourt and the other in the air.

Both partners disagreed with my call saying Blue 2 had not established himself in front court because he needed to have both feet frontcourt first.

I told them I agreed if he was dribbling, but not if he was holding the ball.

Anyone got an older casebook play that addresses this specific situation?

[Lotto]

I don't have a casebook play, but you got the call right. Good job!

[MikeCapps]

you were right.

While hlding the ball and one foot already establish front court once the back foot is lifted off the floor the ball has front court status.

[TravelinMan]

Ranjo, way to stick to your guns. Maybe your partners should start attending this forum.

The closest reference I can find in the Case Book is 4.4.1 - A2 catches the ball while both feet are on the floor, with one foot on either side of the division line. A2 lifts the foot which is in the frontcourt and then puts it back on the floor in the backcourt, IT IS A BACKCOURT VIOLATION. When A2, WHILE HOLDING THE BALL, lifts the foot which was in the backcourt, the ball is now in the frontcourt. When A2's foot then touches in the backcourt, it is a violation.

The key is as you said "holding the ball"

__________________________________________________ _________
“The foolish and the dead alone never change their opinion."--James Russell Lowell

[SMEngmann]

Sounds like your partners got confused with the football rule of having to re-establish both feet inbounds, this call gets botched a lot. Good call.

[JugglingReferee]

[mick]

Originally posted by TravelinMan
Ranjo, way to stick to your guns. Maybe your partners should start attending this forum.

The closest reference I can find in the Case Book is 4.4.1 - A2 catches the ball while both feet are on the floor, with one foot on either side of the division line. A2 lifts the foot which is in the frontcourt and then puts it back on the floor in the backcourt, IT IS A BACKCOURT VIOLATION. When A2, WHILE HOLDING THE BALL, lifts the foot which was in the backcourt, the ball is now in the frontcourt. When A2's foot then touches in the backcourt, it is a violation.

The key is as you said "holding the ball"

__________________________________________________ _________
“The foolish and the dead alone never change their opinion."--James Russell Lowell

Oops.

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by SMEngmann
Sounds like your partners got confused with the football rule of having to re-establish both feet inbounds, this call gets botched a lot.

Never heard of that rule.

[ChrisSportsFan]

something in the front court and nothing in the backcourt makes for front court possession.

[Hard]

If the player is holding the ball and straddling the line, and picks up his backcourt foot to pivot, and returns it to the backcourt, this is a backcourt violation?!! I wouldn't think so.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Hard
If the player is holding the ball and straddling the line, and picks up his backcourt foot to pivot, and returns it to the backcourt, this is a backcourt violation?!! I wouldn't think so.

Unfortunately, you would think wrong. Case book play 4.4.1(a) is the exact same play, and the ruling there is that it's a backcourt violation.

[Hard]

I guess that's why I check this place out. I'm always learning. Thanks for the reference.

[TravelinMan]

Originally posted by mick

Oops.

Mick, just testing to see if you were awake.