backcourt

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

A1 is standing in the frontcourt in the FT semi-circle. He has the ball. He turns around and throws the ball so that it strikes his opponents backboard in the backcourt and rebounds back towards him. The ball bounces on the floor in the frontcourt at the top of the key and A1 then catches it, having never moved from his original position. No other player touched the ball at anytime during this sequence.

Is this a BC violation ?

Yes, it is but it may not be called. This falls into the category of everybody stares and thinks "What the hell??" By the time you figure out there is no answer to this question, the violation has sometimes passed you by. I personally am guilty of this, but I may be the only one.

[eg-italy]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

This is one area where I think FIBA actually has a better rule. As I understand it from what has been posted here before, when the ball touches in the backcourt after last being touched in the frontcourt by an offensive player, it is a backcourt violation. There is no need for an offensive player to be the first to touch it.

It is treated almost the same as if the division line were a sideline. When you think of it like this, the call is obvious.

This is not true. The FIBA rule is very similar to the USA one(s). It is not at all similar to an OOB situation, nor there is a "delayed violation".

However, in the case under consideration, we would not call a violation, because 30.1.2 mentions explicitly "touch the ball in the backcourt".

As usual, the FIBA rule is definitely worse; for example, there is no special case when the dribbler goes from backcourt to frontcourt. Just imagine: if one foot has touched the FC and the other is in the BC, it is theoretically a violation to lift the foot in the FC. Of course we teach to look not so closely in those situations.

Ciao

[Jimgolf]

Originally Posted by eg-italy

This is not true. The FIBA rule is very similar to the USA one(s).

Thanks for the clarification. I thought someone had posted that it was not necessary for a player to touch the ball elsewhere on the forum, but I must have misunderstood the post.

Never mind.

[kycat1]

Gentlemen,
I know I disagreed with all of you about this play so I said that maybe I was wrong but I wanted clarification from the rules committee at NFHS. I contacted the NFHS and they said all rule questions and interpretaions had to be resolved by your state rules authority. This is the person chosen by the NHFS to teach and interpret rules for our intire state. So I sent this backcourt question to my state rules authority for an interpretaion and explaination on exactly why would this be a backcourt violation (since many of you thought I was stupid for thinking that this could possibly NOT be a backcourt violation!).
Here is his answer copied from my e-mail : This would not be a backcourt violation.

If you have any further questions, please give me a call.

He is traveling the state this week conducting the annual state new basketball rules meeting for refs and coaches. I will see him on Wednesday and I will verify in person with him that he still thinks it is not a violation and let you all know why or why not!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by kycat1

... (since many of you thought I was stupid for thinking that this could possibly NOT be a backcourt violation!)

We didn't think you were stupid for not thinking it was a backcourt violation, we thought you were stupid for not reading the rules references that were being posted.

You state interpreter may be related to Kurt Whats-his-name in Illinois.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by kycat1

Gentlemen,

He is traveling the state this week conducting the annual state new basketball rules meeting for refs and coaches. I will see him on Wednesday and I will verify in person with him that he still thinks it is not a violation and let you all know why or why not!

Naw, just tell him to log on this site. We'll be glad to train him.

Sounds like he could really use some training.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

We didn't think you were stupid for not thinking it was a backcourt violation, we thought you were stupid for not reading the rules references that were being posted.

You state interpreter may be related to Kurt Whats-his-name in Illinois.

Hey, don't be raggin' on Illinois. I might hafta' send Mr. Urlacher over to straighten you out...

I would be curious to see if kycat1's interpreter comes back with a specific rules reference to back up the response. Of course, it could be like Kurt Whats-his-name's response, an off-the-cuff response without actually checking it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I would be curious to see if kycat1's interpreter comes back with a specific rules reference to back up the response. Of course, it could be like Kurt Whats-his-name's response, an off-the-cuff response without actually checking it.

Jmo, but a likelier option might be kycat not giving the interpreter the play as written in this thread. I can't see any state interpreter...anywhere....screwing up this one. It's just too basic and easy a ruling to make.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Jmo, but a likelier option might be kycat not giving the interpreter the play as written in this thread. I can't see any state interpreter...anywhere....screwing up this one. It's just too basic and easy a ruling to make.

Given the number of officials that come here that don't know the backcourt rule, do you really think is it not likely that at least 1 out of 50 state interpreters could get it wrong?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Given the number of officials that come here that don't know the backcourt rule, do you really think is it not likely that at least 1 out of 50 state interpreters could get it wrong?

Let me put it this way, Camron, I would hope not. And if one did, I would be surprised.

But, I guess stranger things have happened.....

It just isn't a tough call imo; it's pretty straightforward.

[jallen]

you do say the ball has front court status, which means it is no longer in the back court. no violation as described. if the back spin caused it to roll on the court back into the front court, once it is in the FC, no violation. However what is interesting is if the back spin caused it to bounce. It hits the back court, bounces and due to back spin begins it's return to the front court. However, while still in the air but before it touches the front court, the offensive team touches the ball. Back over, even if the ball has crossed the center court division line in the air but not touched the front court yet, violation. I have never seen this happen.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jallen

you do say the ball has front court status, which means it is no longer in the back court. no violation as described. if the back spin caused it to roll on the court back into the front court, once it is in the FC, no violation.

Sigh.....

Completely wrong.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jallen

you do say the ball has front court status, which means it is no longer in the back court. no violation as described. if the back spin caused it to roll on the court back into the front court, once it is in the FC, no violation. However what is interesting is if the back spin caused it to bounce. It hits the back court, bounces and due to back spin begins it's return to the front court. However, while still in the air but before it touches the front court, the offensive team touches the ball. Back over, even if the ball has crossed the center court division line in the air but not touched the front court yet, violation. I have never seen this happen.

jallen,
You have the same incorrect understanding as kycat. Please read all of the posts in this entire thread.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You state interpreter may be related to Kurt Whats-his-name in Illinois.

LMOA !!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Naw, just tell him to log on this site. We'll be glad to train him.

Sounds like he could really use some training.

Now I'm ROTFLMAO !!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Given the number of officials that come here that don't know the backcourt rule, do you really think is it not likely that at least 1 out of 50 state interpreters could get it wrong?

Sadly, I have to agree. There are just way too many officials out there who don't know the backcourt rule. Someone somewhere has to be teaching it incorrectly.

[Jurassic Referee]

It looks like it's time for BktBallRef's annual exam, methinks.