Quick over and back question

[lukealex]

Is it over and back if A1 (who is in the FC) passes to A2 who has jumped from the BC, catches the ball in mid-air and lands in the FC?

[SeanFitzRef]

YES.

[M&M Guy]

Yep.

A2 has the same status as where they last touched - BC.

[SeanFitzRef]

A2 must establish court position in the front court. Team possession has already been established in the front court by A1. A2 has to take at least one step in the front court to be established.

[lukealex]

Would the same rule apply if the player was out of bounds, caught the ball in mid-air, then landed in bounds?

[M&M Guy]

Yep, same theory.

[Man In Blue]

So- are you still angry at the official that got it right?

[lukealex]

Nope, that would be me that got it right, would like to be able to show the team (rec ball) and other ref who thought I was so wrong how right I actually was though

[ChrisSportsFan]

Just remember that you are where you are until you get where you're going.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by M&M Guy
Yep, same theory.

Same theory, but it's not a back-court violation, it's an oob violation. Same result, but different signal.

[lukealex]

Originally posted by ChrisSportsFan
Just remember that you are where you are until you get where you're going.

I didn't think that always worked since on in-bounds situations there isn't any team control - a player can jump from FC, catch ball mid-air, land in BC, not a violation. But if a player was OOB for some odd reason and there wasn't team control (in-bounds, shot attempt, etc.) it would still be a violation since the player came from OOB and touched the ball before touching the court in bounds, assuming a violation wasn't called when the player was OOB.

[Robmoz]

Originally posted by ChrisSportsFan
Just remember that you are where you are until you get where you're going.

If you follow this simple little phrase you will always remember and be able ot explain it when the players and coaches go nutz!

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by lukealex

I didn't think that always worked since on in-bounds situations there isn't any team control - a player can jump from FC, catch ball mid-air, land in BC, not a violation. But if a player was OOB for some odd reason and there wasn't team control (in-bounds, shot attempt, etc.) it would still be a violation since the player came from OOB and touched the ball before touching the court in bounds, assuming a violation wasn't called when the player was OOB.

You are correct...it's stated as an EXCEPTION in the rules book....

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by Robmoz

If you follow this simple little phrase you will always remember and be able ot explain it when the players and coaches go nutz!

Actually - it's "You are where you were 'till you get where you're going."

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Same theory, but it's not a back-court violation, it's an oob violation. Same result, but different signal.

Agreed - I was just going with the quick answer trying to point out that it was a violation as well. I also wanted to avoid long answers and words rhyming with "truck".

Now, I am at work and I am going to lunch.