Possesion

[IREFU2]

I was trying to figure out why my statement wasnt correct.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by IREFU2
[/B]

Can you tell me an instance when there is a throw-in in the FC, where there could be a BC violation with the exception of team control or player control? [/B][/QUOTE]There aren't any instances. You cannot have a backcourt violation on a throw-in if there never was team control in the front court. And remember that you can't have team control without first establishing player control.

You would have a backcourt violation though if a player caught the ball with one foot on the floor in the frontcourt and then stepped into the backcourt with the other foot. In that case, the player established player and team control in the front court with that one foot on the floor in the front court.

Is that what you were looking for? Something like that?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by IREFU2
I was trying to figure out why my statement wasnt correct.

Your statement "there is no TC on a throw-in" is correct.

But, in the play presented, there was PC, and thus TC, when A1 caught the ball. A1 needn't be "on the ground" to establish PC.

If we look at the four rules:

1) A has TC -- yes, when A1 catches the ball (note -- I didn't go back to see which specific number was the inbounder and which specific number caught the ball)

2) Ball in FC -- yes, since A1 left the court from the FC

3) A last to touch -- yes

4) A first to touch -- yes

So, as Chuck said, we would have a violation, except for the three exceptions in the rule -- throw-in, defense, jump ball.

[FishinRef]

There are several exceptions to the "Backcourt Violation".
Look in Case Book at 9.9.1.B.
It describes a jump ball sitch, but the same procedure exists on a throw-in. The key is that the player is AIRBORN when they receive the ball and establish Team Control.
9.9.1.A describes the player having "One Foot" in A's frontcourt when Team Control is established.
IMO the best way to think of it is, where is the player & ball when the ball is PUT IN PLAY. We all know it is a LIVE BALL when at the disposal of the thrower.

[SamIAm]

Originally posted by IREFU2

Can you tell me an instance when there is a throw-in in the FC, where there could be a BC violation with the exception of team control or player control?

I hope you don't mind me jumping in here, JR is well aware of the rules and various situations. Being that the throw-in ends when the ball is touched by a player, there isn't much happening "during" the throw-in. However immediately afterward BC violations might occur. (See BasketBallRef's backcourt quiz for examples.) The BC exemption would end if A1 (who received the throw-in in the air after jumping while in the FC)passed the ball to a teammate in the BC, lo, a BC violation

[IREFU2]

Originally posted by SamIAm

I hope you don't mind me jumping in here, JR is well aware of the rules and various situations. Being that the throw-in ends when the ball is touched by a player, there isn't much happening "during" the throw-in. However immediately afterward BC violations might occur. (See BasketBallRef's backcourt quiz for examples.) The BC exemption would end if A1 (who received the throw-in in the air after jumping while in the FC)passed the ball to a teammate in the BC, lo, a BC violation

Ahhh, thats what I was looking for! Thanks.

[Ref in PA]

Starting with 2003-2004 rule book, the rule was rewritten to make the "exception" cases part of the rule. Previously, the specific instances of 1. during a throw-in; 2. during a jump ball; and, 3. when the defense secures possession were all part of EXCEPTION 1 to rule 9-9-2. Just a little history.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by IREFU2

Can you tell me an instance when there is a throw-in in the FC, where there could be a BC violation with the exception of team control or player control?

A1 throws to A2 who jumped from the FC, catches the ball and while still in the air, passes it to A3 who is standing in the BC.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

OK, How about this.

A1 throws in to A2. A2 jumps from the frontcourt, catches the pass in the air. While still in the air, B1 dislodges the ball, which then begins bouncing in the frontcourt toward the backcourt. A2 attempts to re-secure control of the ball, but instead knocks the ball into the backcourt, where he then recovers it.

Violation?

[IREFU2]

Originally posted by Whistles & Stripes
OK, How about this.

A1 throws in to A2. A2 jumps from the frontcourt, catches the pass in the air. While still in the air, B1 dislodges the ball, which then begins bouncing in the frontcourt toward the backcourt. A2 attempts to re-secure control of the ball, but instead knocks the ball into the backcourt, where he then recovers it.

Violation?

Still backcourt violation.

[FishinRef]

The NFHS Case Book doesn't imply that it is backcourt.

9.9.1.b

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally posted by IREFU2

Still backcourt violation.

Please explain why you think so.

[assignmentmaker]

For clarity, I want to emphasize the final sentences of 9-9-3, the 'exception' statute: "The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt."

I believe on of BktBallRef's Backcourt Quiz questions brings out the fact that, were a player to land on one foot in the frontcourt and stay on that foot while trying to make a play, the exception would terminate, the player would be in the frontcourt, and could no longer bring a foot down in the backcourt, nor jump off of one onto two in the backcourt.

[IREFU2]

Originally posted by FishinRef
The NFHS Case Book doesn't imply that it is backcourt.

9.9.1.b

yeah, but that is talking about a jump ball.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by Whistles & Stripes
OK, How about this.

A1 throws in to A2. A2 jumps from the frontcourt, catches the pass in the air. While still in the air, B1 dislodges the ball, which then begins bouncing in the frontcourt toward the backcourt. A2 attempts to re-secure control of the ball, but instead knocks the ball into the backcourt, where he then recovers it.

Violation?

A2 secures team control and establishes the ball location as frontcourt. B1's dislodgement maintains the ball's location in frontcourt without ending A's team control. If A2 is in frontcourt and knocks it to backcourt then retrieves it, it's a violation as he becomes both last to touch and first to touch. If he's in backcourt when he touches it, it's a violation immediately. You might suggest that B1 was the last to touch it before it went to backcourt, but that would not be correct. A2 became simultaneously the last to touch it before it went to backcourt, and the first to touch it once it did.