Backcourt violation?

[zebraman]

I know it's obvious, but there isn't going to be any consensus reached on a philosophical question like this one.

For me, in a high school game, I'm probably going to call an obvious palm, even if the dribbler isn't being defended. At the JC level, I'm not.

[rockyroad]

Since Dan brought in the baseball reference, I'll throw in a football one...sweep play to left side...runner is already 5 yards downfield and on the left sideline. Right tackle is holding the defensive end 15 yards away from the play. White Hat does not throw flag...was it a hold? Yep...did it have any impact on the play or the game? Nope...

Isn't that the same idea being used here on these violations...understand I am not voting for or against this philosophy, just pointing out that it is used in all sports, not just basketball...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Since Dan brought in the baseball reference, I'll throw in a football one...sweep play to left side...runner is already 5 yards downfield and on the left sideline. Right tackle is holding the defensive end 15 yards away from the play. White Hat does not throw flag...was it a hold? Yep...did it have any impact on the play or the game? Nope...

Isn't that the same idea being used here on these violations...

Nope, think right tackle going offside on a sweep around the left end instead. Football uses the same concepts. You can call some fouls by using advantage/disadvantage. Other fouls however must be called because they are so obvious, even if they don't really affect the play.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

Ok, here's a play that someone mentioned to me and I wanted opinions. A1 is holding the ball in his frontcourt near the midcourt line. The referee is standing nearby and is straddling the midcourt line; one foot in the frontcourt, one foot in the backcourt. A1 pivots and steps on the ref's "frontcourt" foot.

Is this a backcourt violation, just as if the official were straddling the OOB line? I think so.

But here's the tricky twist. What if we change it so that it's not the referee straddling the line, but another player instead? Is it still a backcourt violation? Because now, the OOB analogy doesn't work. It's not a violation to touch another player who is OOB while holding the ball. In that case, it's only a violation for the ball to touch the player who is OOB. So is it a backcourt violation to touch a player who is in the backcourt while holding the ball?

Not backcourt and I would leave it alone totally unless the player touches the foot that is in the backcourt.