Throw-in/Backcourt violation?

[Zoochy]

4 plays. Legal or violation? And why!!!

(1) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their front court. A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. A2 jumps from their frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.

(2) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their backcourt (Team B’s frontcourt).
A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from their frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.

(3) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their backcourt (Team B’s frontcourt).
A1’s throw-in is intercepted by B1. B1 had jumped from their frontcourt, caught the ball in the air and lands first foot in the frontcourt, second foot in the backcourt.

(4) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their front court (Team B’s backcourt). A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from their backcourt court, catches the ball in the air and lands first foot in the frontcourt, second foot in the backcourt.

[Mregor]

All legal plays. No control on throw in. There is an exception which allows the player who secures control with both feet off the floor, to make a normal landing.

Mregor

[Ed Maeder]

All legal as per rule 9-9-3.

[rainmaker]

No matter where the throw-ins are from, they're all legal. (Weird sentence)

All those throw-ins are legal from anywhere oob, even either endline. There is no team control, and thus no front court or back court status on a throw-in.

[Nevadaref]

This is more complicated than people seem to think.

Let's look at the specific wording of 9-9-3:
. . . A player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in) may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.

There is currently a debate on whether the words in the parenthetical are the ONLY three times that such action is permitted, since they used to be the three exceptions prior to the rewording of the rule, or if they are merely three examples of a player from the team not in control and other occasions of this are also allowed by the now more inclusive wording.
BktBallRef who is basically our backcourt guru has taken the former stance, while I have supported the latter.

Therefore, if we turn to the plays Zoochy inquired about, we get the following differing rulings:

Originally Posted by Zoochy

4 plays. Legal or violation? And why!!!

(1) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their front court. A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. A2 jumps from their frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.
BktBallRef would likely say: Violation because this is not DURING the throw-in. The throw-in ended when B1 touched the ball.
Nevadaref: Legal play as the action was done by a player from the team not in control.

(2) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their backcourt (Team B’s frontcourt).
A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from their frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.
I not sure of BktBallRef's answer for this one. He might rule the same as in #1, but he might also consider B2 to be a defensive player even though Team A does not have team control during the play and thus rule this a legal play.
Nevadaref: Legal play, same reason as #1.

(3) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their backcourt (Team B’s frontcourt).
A1’s throw-in is intercepted by B1. B1 had jumped from their frontcourt, caught the ball in the air and lands first foot in the frontcourt, second foot in the backcourt.
BktBallRef: Legal play, during a throw-in (might also be a defensive player) and B1 is permitted to make a normal landing and per 9-9-3 it makes no difference which foot lands first or where.
Nevadaref: Legal play the landing is normal and the order of the feet doesn't matter.

(4) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their front court (Team B’s backcourt). A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from their backcourt court, catches the ball in the air and lands first foot in the frontcourt, second foot in the backcourt.

I have no idea what BktBallRef would rule. I'll hope that he shows up and responds to this post.
Nevadaref: I'm not even sure of my own answer on this one. My ruling is that this is a backcourt violation. It is probably splitting hairs, but that's my call. Why? Since B2 jumped from his BACKCOURT rule 9-9-3 does not apply to him as that rule specifies a player jumping from his FRONTCOURT. Likewise, since the player is holding the ball, not dribbling it, 4-4-6 (what we call the three points rule) doesn't apply either. Rules 4-35 and 4-4-2 appear to be controlling. When B2 catches the ball both player and team control are established. Since B2 jumped from his backcourt both he and the ball have backcourt status at this time. When the first foot touches in the frontcourt and the second foot has yet to touch the floor the player has frontcourt status per 4-35-1b and 4-35-2 and thus the ball has frontcourt status per 4-4-2. When the second foot lands in the backcourt, the player and the ball both gain backcourt status per the same rules. Thus a backcourt violation has occurred per 9-9-1.

Great post Zoochy!

[Ed Maeder]

Nevada you always get my head spinning. Good thoughts on these plays. Now if a coach could only understand it this way.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This is more complicated than people seem to think.

Let's look at the specific wording of 9-9-3:
[COLOR=blue] . . . A player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in) may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt.

The deflection does not change the fact that A is still not in control.
As I recall, the exception in Tony's quiz referred to a player from team A jumping from frontcourt, catching the throw-in while in mid-air, then passing it to a teammate in backcourt. Big difference, is it not?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The deflection does not change the fact that A is still not in control.

At the time between the deflection and when the player catches the ball there is no control. That is right. However, once the player catches the ball, there is both player and team control. Also, the deflection ends the throw-in, so the player who catches the ball is not catching a throw-in pass. Does that make a difference in your thinking?

Originally Posted by just another ref

As I recall, the exception in Tony's quiz referred to a player from team A jumping from frontcourt, catching the throw-in while in mid-air, then passing it to a teammate in backcourt. Big difference, is it not?

That play is a backcourt violation in the NFHS, but it is a legal play in the NCAA.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

At the time between the deflection and when the player catches the ball there is no control. That is right. However, once the player catches the ball, there is both player and team control. Also, the deflection ends the throw-in, so the player who catches the ball is not catching a throw-in pass. Does that make a difference in your thinking?

no

That play is a backcourt violation in the NFHS, but it is a legal play in the NCAA.

His quiz, I believe, is based on NFHS rules. I could be wrong.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The deflection does not change the fact that A is still not in control.
As I recall, the exception in Tony's quiz referred to a player from team A jumping from frontcourt, catching the throw-in while in mid-air, then passing it to a teammate in backcourt. Big difference, is it not?

B1 touches the ball ending the throw-in.

A2 leps from his FC, therefore having FC status.

When he catches the ball, he has FC status and he establishes team control.

When he lands in the BC, he has violated.

It's no different than catching said ball and throwing it to a teammate in the BC.

Folks may not like it, it may not fit what people have always said, but it is a violation. This play is not DURING a throw-in.

[BktBallRef]

Well great! Everyone agrees with me!

[Zoochy]

I still have a thought on the 2nd play...

(2) Throw-in for Team A near the division line in their backcourt (Team B’s frontcourt). A1’s throw-in is deflected by B1 who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from their frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.
BktBallRef says...
LEGAL. The rule allows a defensive player to leave his FC, catch the ball and land in his BC.
I am not 100% sure that B2 is a defensive player. Here is why.
There is no defination for offensive or defensive player. The only time I see the word 'defense' in the rule book is in reference to a player on the team that is not 'in control' of the ball.
Block/Charge 4-7-2a. A player ... with the ball ... avoid contact if a defensive player .....
Free Throw Administration 8-1-4a. Marked lane spaces ... four defensive and two offensive. When A1 has disposal of the ball for free throws there is player and team control.
So my point is that there is NO team control during a Throw-in. Thus when B2catches the ball after it had been deflected by teammate B1, he has now established player/team control from a loose ball. Since B2 has Frontcourt status when he jumps and catches the ball and now lands in backcourt, backcourt violation occurs.
In conclusion, the only legal play would be play 3, because 9-9-3 would still apply. B2 has caught a throw in with both feet off the floor after leaving his frontcourt.
WOW... think about it and get back to me. OK?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

B1 touches the ball ending the throw-in.

A2 leps from his FC, therefore having FC status.

When he catches the ball, he has FC status and he establishes team control.

When he lands in the BC, he has violated.

It's no different than catching said ball and throwing it to a teammate in the BC.

Folks may not like it, it may not fit what people have always said, but it is a violation. This play is not DURING a throw-in.

. A player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in) may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.

Immediately after the throw-in ends in this situation, there is no team control by either team. Therefore I conclude that the team not in control in this instance means either team. Therefore, no matter who jumps up and secures control in mid-air, he is entitled to come down anywhere on the court without a violation.

Do you suppose those NFHS guys would pay some of us to proofread?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Immediately after the throw-in ends in this situation, there is no team control by either team.

But there is team control when A2 catches the ball. This is EXACTLY why he can't catch a pass while in flight from the FC and pass to a teammate in the BC.

Therefore I conclude that the team not in control in this instance means either team. Therefore, no matter who jumps up and secures control in mid-air, he is entitled to come down anywhere on the court without a violation.

Then cite your rule reference because the one above ain't it. A2 is not a defender and the play is not during a jump ball or a throw-in. Therefore, your cite does not apply.

Another play:

A1 shoots, ball comes off the backboard and rim hard and bounds all the way out to the division line. A2 leaps from his FC, catches the ball while airborne, and lands in the BC. Is this a violation? Damn skippy it is.

Sorry guys but you're wrong. As the rule is written, the first play posted by Zooch is a violation.

[Nevadaref]

I don't see your point.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is currently a debate on whether the words in the parenthetical are the ONLY three times that such action is permitted, since they used to be the three exceptions prior to the rewording of the rule, or if they are merely three examples of a player from the team not in control and other occasions of this are also allowed by the now more inclusive wording.
BktBallRef who is basically our backcourt guru has taken the former stance, while I have supported the latter.

Are you on my side of this debate or BktBallRef's?