Backcourt

[pforeferee]

Hello...new to forum and new referee!

I'm suffering some confusion on a backcourt situation. A1 is in their backcourt dribbling, when B1 comes from behind in a steal attempt and slaps the ball across the center line into B's backcourt. B1 crosses into her backcourt and starts dribbling.

Is this a backcourt call because she was the last one to touch it in her frontcourt or is it a no call because slapping the ball away from A1 didn't establish player or team control before going into the backcourt?

Also, here's one more. A1 is dribbling the ball and B1 comes from behind and slaps the ball away. B1's momentum takes him out of bounds, but he hustles back onto the court, picks up the bouncing ball and starts a dribble. This isn't a problem, is it?

Thanks!

[mj]

Originally posted by pforeferee
Hello...new to forum and new referee!

I'm suffering some confusion on a backcourt situation. A1 is in their backcourt dribbling, when B1 comes from behind in a steal attempt and slaps the ball across the center line into B's backcourt. B1 crosses into her backcourt and starts dribbling.

Is this a backcourt call because she was the last one to touch it in her frontcourt or is it a no call because slapping the ball away from A1 didn't establish player or team control before going into the backcourt?

Also, here's one more. A1 is dribbling the ball and B1 comes from behind and slaps the ball away. B1's momentum takes him out of bounds, but he hustles back onto the court, picks up the bouncing ball and starts a dribble. This isn't a problem, is it?

Thanks!

Not a backcourt violation. Team B was never in control in their frontcourt.

[yankeesfan]

Originally posted by pforeferee
Hello...new to forum and new referee!

I'm suffering some confusion on a backcourt situation. A1 is in their backcourt dribbling, when B1 comes from behind in a steal attempt and slaps the ball across the center line into B's backcourt. B1 crosses into her backcourt and starts dribbling.


Thanks!

is A1 in the backcourt or not? something is not right in your question. is A1 on his side of the court or not? you said A1 is in the backcourt and B1 slaps the ball into their backcourt, how could that be. can you clarify. if it is what i think it is, there is no backcourt viloation. B1 never established position in her frontcourt to have a violation.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by yankeesfan
is A1 in the backcourt or not? something is not right in your question.

A1 is in his backcourt, which is also B1's frontcourt. So B1 batted it from B's frontcourt into B's backcourt and then was the first to touch it in B's backcourt. The quesiton is whether this is a violation.

And the answer that was given is correct. It is not a violation, b/c even tho B1 was last to touch the ball in B's frontcourt, Team B did not have team control at that time.

Hope that clears it up.

[TimTaylor]

mj is correct - remember the three elements of a backcourt violation in the order they must occur.

1. Team control
2. Last touched if front court by player of team with team control.
2. First touched in back court by player of team with team control.

What's missing here is the element of team control - the slap of the ball by B1 does not establish player control, therefore A still had team control. When B1 gained player control by dribbling in their own backcourt, only then was team control by B established.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by TimTaylor
2. Last touched if front court by player of team with team control.
2. First touched in back court by player of team with team control.

These are not really correct, Tim. You can have a backcourt violation without anyone touching the ball in the frontcourt. You can also have a backcourt violation without anyone touching the ball in the backcourt.

It's not where you touch the ball; it's when you touch it. The components of a backcourt violation are actually:

1) Team Control;
2) Ball gains frontcourt status;
3) Team A is last to touch ball before it gains backcourt status;
4) Team A is first to touch ball after it gains backcourt status.

[assignmentmaker]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

These are not really correct, Tim. You can have a backcourt violation without anyone touching the ball in the frontcourt. You can also have a backcourt violation without anyone touching the ball in the backcourt.

It's not where you touch the ball; it's when you touch it. The components of a backcourt violation are actually:

1) Team Control;
2) Ball gains frontcourt status;
3) Team A is last to touch ball before it gains backcourt status;
4) Team A is first to touch ball after it gains backcourt status.

I think this is an admirably concise expression of the requirements of 9-9, with one exception that I raise only because I hope NevadaRef, if he agrees, and will put it on his list for the Rules Committee.

Say the ball is being passed among teammates (A1 & A2) in the frontcourt and is batted in the air into the airspace over the backcourt, where A3, standing in the backcourt, catches it. At the instant A3 catches it, the ball has front court status; then, simultaneously in a rules sense, it attains backcourt status.

I am not suggesting that we ought call this backcourt, only that either in 9-9, or elsewhere, in a more general sense if in fact the principle holds, a protocol for treating this kind of simultaneous event should be expressed.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by assignmentmaker

At the instant A3 catches it, the ball has front court status; then, simultaneously in a rules sense, it attains backcourt status.

I am not suggesting that we ought call this backcourt, only that either in 9-9, or elsewhere, in a more general sense if in fact the principle holds, a protocol for treating this kind of simultaneous event should be expressed.

I understand your point and have thought about it myself, but here's why it's still NOT a violation, even according to the criteria I listed above.

It's only a violation if A3 is the first to touch the ball after it gains backcourt status. By your own description, A3 touches the ball at the exact moment that it gains backcourt status. Therefore, A3 did not touch it before it had backcourt status. "At the same time" is not equivalent to "before".

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by assignmentmaker

I think this is an admirably concise expression of the requirements of 9-9, with one exception that I raise only because I hope NevadaRef, if he agrees, and will put it on his list for the Rules Committee.

Say the ball is being passed among teammates (A1 & A2) in the frontcourt and is batted in the air into the airspace over the backcourt, where A3, standing in the backcourt, catches it. At the instant A3 catches it, the ball has front court status; then, simultaneously in a rules sense, it attains backcourt status.

I am not suggesting that we ought call this backcourt, only that either in 9-9, or elsewhere, in a more general sense if in fact the principle holds, a protocol for treating this kind of simultaneous event should be expressed.

While I understand the confusion over this play because of the status of the ball in flight, it is my position that the text of the rule itself, not the four points expression, is what we should look at and that it is clear enough as is.

RULE 9, Section 9
ART. 1 . . . A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.


I have always said that in your scenario A3 is not the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt, rather this player is merely the first to touch the ball in the backcourt despite the status of the ball changing at the exact moment A3 touches the ball. Whichever opponent batted the ball into the air was the last player to touch the ball in the frontcourt.


So my take on this play is that the actual text of the rule covers this play just fine and that it is legal.

[Skarecrow]

While I understand the confusion over this play because of the status of the ball in flight, it is my position that the text of the rule itself, not the four points expression, is what we should look at and that it is clear enough as is.

RULE 9, Section 9
ART. 1 . . . A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.


I have always said that in your scenario A3 is not the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt, rather this player is merely the first to touch the ball in the backcourt despite the status of the ball changing at the exact moment A3 touches the ball. Whichever opponent batted the ball into the air was the last player to touch the ball in the frontcourt.


So my take on this play is that the actual text of the rule covers this play just fine and that it is legal. [/B][/QUOTE]
I might be wrong, and probably am, but if it is batted in the air by the defense, then it is not backcourt for A3 to catch it...If it is batted into backcourt by A1 or A2, and then A3 catches it, it IS backcourt....how can it be anything but? Skarecrow

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
I understand your point and have thought about it myself, but here's why it's still NOT a violation, even according to the criteria I listed above.

It's only a violation if A3 is the first to touch the ball after it gains backcourt status. By your own description, A3 touches the ball at the exact moment that it gains backcourt status. Therefore, A3 did not touch it before it had backcourt status. "At the same time" is not equivalent to "before".

Check, you'd better read this play again.

This is a BC violation. There's nothing in the play that says the ball was touched by anyone except Team A.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by assignmentmaker
I think this is an admirably concise expression of the requirements of 9-9, with one exception that I raise only because I hope NevadaRef, if he agrees, and will put it on his list for the Rules Committee.

Say the ball is being passed among teammates (A1 & A2) in the frontcourt and is batted in the air into the airspace over the backcourt, where A3, standing in the backcourt, catches it. At the instant A3 catches it, the ball has front court status; then, simultaneously in a rules sense, it attains backcourt status.

THe ball was batted by whom?

If by B1, then it's not a violation (I assume that's what you meant). IF by Ax, then it is a violaiton (duh!).

IMO, the confusion over this rule comes because too many officials use the axiom "A BC violation is the same as an OOB violation, except the ball must be touched by A".

On an OOB violation, a player who stands OOB and catches / touches a ball "causes the ball to go OOB" (or whatever the specific wording is). That same phrase DOES NOT exist in any of the BC discussions. So, when A3 catches the ball in the BC, A23 DID NOT cause the ball to go to the BC -- whoever last touched the ball before A3 caused it to go BC.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Check, you'd better read this play again.

This is a BC violation. There's nothing in the play that says the ball was touched by anyone except Team A.

Tiny, you're exactly right. As written, it is indeed a violation. I assumed as I was reading it that the bat was by a B player, but it doesn't say that. I think that is what Jeff meant, tho, b/c he says he wouldn't call the play a violation. If he really meant what he wrote, it would be an obvious violation. Sorry for any confusion.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Tiny, you're exactly right.

LOLOLOL!!

[assignmentmaker]

Originally posted by rainmaker

LOLOLOL!!

I absolutely agree it's backcourt. I just think the language doesn't distinguish whether or not ball location or player location is to be considered.

But my horse is dead here! "Don't be bein' last in the front, first in the back" gets the point across.