what's the call??

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You were not very clear, but assuming that the B player was in the FC, you cannot have a violation. B put the ball in the backcourt, not team A. Team control would not be a factor either. Team A never gained control in the FC.

Team A did not gain control in the front court. The ball is hit off a Team B player in the FC and caroms into the back court. I see where you are going with this, but the point is Team A had nothing to do with the status of ball in the FC. The status of the ball is a huge part of any BC violation. Team control would not be a factor if they never had status in the FC. I think we are playing around with semantics, but from my point of view you have at least had to control the ball in the FC which did not take place in this play to even have a FC.

Peace

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Team A did not gain control in the front court. The ball is hit off a Team B player in the FC and caroms into the back court. I see where you are going with this, but the point is Team A had nothing to do with the status of ball in the FC. The status of the ball is a huge part of any BC violation. Team control would not be a factor if they never had status in the FC. I think we are playing around with semantics, but from my point of view you have at least had to control the ball in the FC which did not take place in this play to even have a FC.

Peace

I agree it is not backcourt. However JRut, assuming that B is standing the fc the fact that A has team control and the ball touches B, who is in the FC, gives the ball FC status, no different than if it had hit the floor in the FC. However with all that said, I do believe it is a moot point, I got the feeling that A had the ball in the front court to begin with.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by cmathews

However with all that said, I do believe it is a moot point, I got the feeling that A had the ball in the front court to begin with.

Maybe that's because the OP starts with this little nugget.

Originally Posted by 81artmonk

Player A has the ball in the front court.

[cmathews]

that might well indeed be why I thought that LOL

[JoeTheRef]

This was taught to me early on regarding backcourt. It's called the 3A(AAA) method. IF you don't have the any one of the 3-As then it can't be backcourt.

Did A have position in the front court? Was A the last to touch it in the front court? Was A the first to touch it in the backcourt?

In this case you're missing 2 of the 3. Team A never had front court status, nor were they the last one to touch it in the front court.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

This was taught to me early on regarding backcourt. It's called the 3A(AAA) method. IF you don't have the any one of the 3-As then it can't be backcourt.

Did A have position in the front court? Was A the last to touch it in the front court? Was A the first to touch it in the backcourt?

In this case you're missing 2 of the 3. Team A never had front court status, nor were they the last one to touch it in the front court.

"position" should've read possession or front court status.

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

This was taught to me early on regarding backcourt. It's called the 3A(AAA) method. IF you don't have the any one of the 3-As then it can't be backcourt.

Did A have position in the front court? Was A the last to touch it in the front court? Was A the first to touch it in the backcourt?

I agree

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

In this case you're missing 2 of the 3. Team A never had front court status, nor were they the last one to touch it in the front court.

I disagree, in both the OP and Snaqwells post Team A had control. The ball gained front court status by being touched by a player in the Front Court. So we have 2 out of 3 so far in both posts...A has control, and the ball has been in the front court. All that is left is whether or not A was the last to touch it...in the OP they were not the last to touch it, as it went off of B, however in Snaqwells post the ball went off of A3, there we have it all three have been met, BC violation.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by cmathews

I agree



I disagree, in both the OP and Snaqwells post Team A had control. The ball gained front court status by being touched by a player in the Front Court. So we have 2 out of 3 so far in both posts...A has control, and the ball has been in the front court. All that is left is whether or not A was the last to touch it...in the OP they were not the last to touch it, as it went off of B, however in Snaqwells post the ball went off of A3, there we have it all three have been met, BC violation.

You're right. The ball had front court status when it touched a player or the floor in the front court. Thanks.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

This was taught to me early on regarding backcourt. It's called the 3A(AAA) method. IF you don't have the any one of the 3-As then it can't be backcourt.

Did A have position in the front court? Was A the last to touch it in the front court? Was A the first to touch it in the backcourt?

In this case you're missing 2 of the 3. Team A never had front court status, nor were they the last one to touch it in the front court.

A does not need to have possession in the front court. A needs to have team control established. The ball needs to gain FC status; this does not require player control (or possession) in the FC.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

A does not need to have possession in the front court. A needs to have team control established. The ball needs to gain FC status; this does not require player control (or possession) in the FC.

Again you're correct. My AAA thinking was more in line with Team A already having team control in the front court. Thanks.

[81artmonk]

I read the last page of posts. And I am a little confused. Let me clear something up. Team A dribbled the ball up to the front court. looking for a pass. They attempted a pass and before it reached A2 it hits Team B in the butt. Causing the ball to go BC. Team A chases it down and regains possession. So team A had possession bringing it up past the HC line into the front court.

If I read you correctly, than regardless of possession it touched the other team, and thus it wouldn't be a BC violation?? Right?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Team A did not gain control in the front court. The ball is hit off a Team B player in the FC and caroms into the back court. I see where you are going with this, but the point is Team A had nothing to do with the status of ball in the FC. The status of the ball is a huge part of any BC violation. Team control would not be a factor if they never had status in the FC. I think we are playing around with semantics, but from my point of view you have at least had to control the ball in the FC which did not take place in this play to even have a FC.

I realize some may call it this way, but it's not how the rule reads from what I can tell. Consider this scenario:
A1 passes the ball from his BC towards A2 in the FC. B1 leaps and tips the ball towards A3's leg (A3 is standing in the FC), where it bounces into the BC and is recovered by A1.
This has all the legal criteria for a BC violation. A had team control. The ball established FC position upon B1's tip, but team control did not end. A3 was the last to touch the ball in As front court. A1 was the first to touch it in the BC. It's a violation and no A player ever had player control in the FC.
Or, we could make this simpler. Skip B1 and we'll have A2 (standing in the FC) muff A1's pass (from the BC) back to the BC where A1 recovers it. Again, a violation without having player control established in the FC.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I realize some may call it this way, but it's not how the rule reads from what I can tell. Consider this scenario:
A1 passes the ball from his BC towards A2 in the FC. B1 leaps and tips the ball towards A3's leg (A3 is standing in the FC), where it bounces into the BC and is recovered by A1.
This has all the legal criteria for a BC violation. A had team control. The ball established FC position upon B1's tip, but team control did not end. A3 was the last to touch the ball in As front court. A1 was the first to touch it in the BC. It's a violation and no A player ever had player control in the FC.
Or, we could make this simpler. Skip B1 and we'll have A2 (standing in the FC) muff A1's pass (from the BC) back to the BC where A1 recovers it. Again, a violation without having player control established in the FC.

I agree with this and would call the backcourt violation. This is a case play. 9.9.1 Situation C in an old caseplay book that I have.