Weird Backcourt Question

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Lotto

Not true. A1, inbounds in the backcourt, throws a bounce pass which first bounces in the frontcourt, then is caught by A2 in the backcourt. This is a violation, even though A never had control in the frontcourt.

No, no, no, no, no. This is not a BC violation. There was no team control when the ball bounced in the FC.

[Adam]

nine01c,
I think Lotto's play is not referring to a throwin, but the ball is already inbounds.
"Inbounds" here is an adjective, not a verb.

I read it the same way you did, the first time.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by nine01c

Lotto: I'm not sure what these players did (maybe A1 put a good spin on the ball so it hit in frontcourt and bounded into the backcourt. Even so, Team A (nor Team B) does not have control on a throw-in, until one A player gains player control. So, it can theoretically bounce from front to back to front to back (being tipped or batted) and still not be in any Team's control until a player holds or dribbles the ball. There is no frontcourt status just because the ball bounced there. No violation in your play.

I think you misread Lotto's play. The pass originated from a player holding the ball inbounds...not a throwin.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

No, no, no, no, no. This is not a BC violation. There was no team control when the ball bounced in the FC.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. This is a BC violation. A1 threw the ball from a location inbounds in the backcourt. If A1 threw the ball, he had player and team control on the throw.

If you read the inbounds as a verb then A1 was what A2 caught. Hope A1 was not too heavy.

[Adam]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. This is a BC violation. A1 threw the ball from a location inbounds in the backcourt. If A1 threw the ball, he had player and team control on the throw.

If you read the inbounds as a verb then A1 was what A2 caught. Hope A1 was not too heavy.

Yes, it is a violation; but there is also team control established in the front court, even if there was never player control established in the front court.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Snaqwells

A1 has established team control by virtue of having player control. When the ball hits the frontcourt on a bounce pass, the ball gains fc status and team control is maintained by A. Thus, team control has now been established in the front court.

Good job, Snaqwells.
Lotto, you're also incorrect on this statement: "The ball never has frontcourt status here." JLC specified, "Before he picked it up it bounced once in his frontcourt."
In NFHS play the ball has a status of its own if a player is not holding or dribbling it. 4-4-3

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Lotto, you're also incorrect on this statement: "The ball never has frontcourt status here." JLC specified, "Before he picked it up it bounced once in his frontcourt."
In NFHS play the ball has a status of its own if a player is not holding or dribbling it. 4-4-3

You're right...I misread the original play. (I thought *he* bounced the ball in the frontcourt, not *it* bounced in the frontcourt.)

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. This is a BC violation. A1 threw the ball from a location inbounds in the backcourt. If A1 threw the ball, he had player and team control on the throw.

If you read the inbounds as a verb then A1 was what A2 caught. Hope A1 was not too heavy.

My error. His description made it sound like a throw-in to me, which would seem like a legit interp to me.

[hardwdref]

What if team A has possession, ball is tipped by B2 hit's A1's leg goes back court, A2 retrieve's it? or team A in control, both A2 & B2 deflect the ball backcourt, & A2 retrieves it? thanks!

[BktBallRef]

In your first scenario, it's a violation.

In the second, if both players' touched it simultaneously, I would call a violation. But I've never read a specific inerp on such a play.