Backcourt violation?
 

Boys Varsity, two whistle game.

A1 has the ball in their front court near the wing. A1 attempts a hard pass to his teammate near the opposite baseline and inadvertently hits the front of the rim. Ball deflects toward the backcourt. A2 grabs the ball with one foot in the front court and his next step carries him into the backcourt.


Legal play or is it backcourt?

I called backcourt, but I'm not real confident about it.

BC violation with or without the rim being involved.

team control
ball with FC status
last to touch in FC
first to touch in BC

So your saying it would have been a BC violation even if they had not touched the ball until it was in the backcourt?

If A1 made a hard "pass" and not a shot, then team A never lost control and therefore it is a backcourt violation.

Even if they lost control on a "shot," it's a backcourt. A2 regained control with on foot in the front court and the other foot in the air. He has FC status, so the ball has FC status. Putting the 2nd foot down in the BC is a violation.

The thing that made it a back court violation in your opening post was that A2 gained possession in FC and with his next step went into BC.

If A2 had BC location by having all or part of feet already in BC, I would not have called a BC violation. The ball hitting the rim is a "try for goal" in my game. I am not going to try to read the player's mind as to what he/she intended. I will judge the play based on the facts. Ball leaves A1's hands, ball hits rim, therefore it is a try and team control ends. 4.12.2

Coaches, players and fans may argue that it was a pass. It might have, it might not have. I will give the "passer" the benefit of the doubt and call it a try.

There was no doubt that it was a pass, it was just a bad pass. It was an overhand toss to the opposite side, in the corner.

I feel confident that I made the right call now.

Tough call
 

So if we have the same play and the "pass" goes in the basket, are we not going to consider it a try.

And what is A1 is "passing" and gets fouled and the ball goes in the basket?

IMO its a hard sell to say its not a try when the ball hits the rim.

Thanks
David

Further more, if the ball hits the rim; I'm allowing A1 to retrieve it without restriction if it bounces back towards him.

We will not consider it a try, but points will be scored (points are scored whenever (?) a live ball goes through the basket -- whether it was a try or not).

thanks for the clarification, instead of try I should have said attempt for goal.

As we know the try is an attempt to score a field goal.

Thanks
DAvid

Whatever you call it, it still doesn't matter. As Bob said, when a live ball passes through the basket, we score the points (2 or 3). If a player shoots at the wrong basket, it's not a try but we still score the points albeit for the other team. The only difference I can think of where we have to determine whether it is a try or not relates to an event that would cause the ball to become dead. By that I mean, if a try is in flight and time expires, the ball does not become dead and if it goes through the basket we still count it. If it is not a try, the ball becomes dead when time expires. Just like a 3 point basket. We don't have to determine whether it is a try or not, just the location of the person throwing the ball. If they attempt an alley-oop and intsead the ball goes through the basket, it's still a score (2 or 3 depending on location of the thrower) even though it may not be a try. Did I confuse everyone enough already?:confused:

Mregor

I thought that if a player shoots a successful 3-pointer at the wrong basket, it only counts for 2 points for the other team. Is that correct?

Yes, and the previous post did not state any differently.

I alluded to this previously, but there is another case where we have to determine if it was a try. A1 dribbles up the court and picks up his dribble just past the division line. He attempts an alleyoop pass to A2 towards the rim, but instead hits the rim (and only the rim) causing the ball to bounce directly back towards A1, who takes 4 steps before recovering it.
If his throw isn't a try, it's a violation when he touches the ball next. If it is a try, then he's got a new dribble and everything.

it is a try
 

in my game it is a try.....if it hits the rim or the board. The fed doesn't want us reading minds, that is why they put the rule in that says if the ball is thrown from outside the three point line it is 3 pts. Previous to this you could make it 2 pts if you didn't think it was a try. Don't go looking for trouble, it will find us on its own LOL

Your logic is faulty. The fed doesn't want us reading minds, yet you have, in essence, read the Fed mind by indicating they meant something they did not write.

Not that this sitch will come up very often, but I am just saying.

edited for spelling

So, in my situation, are you going to call this kid for a violation?

Y e s

How so, a kid appears to throw a pass from half court toward the goal where his teammate is running toward the basket on a backdoor cut, and the "pass" goes through the hoop it is 3 pts. A few years ago, you could rule this a two point basket because it wasn't a try, and in order to score 3 pts you had to attempt a try. With that logic, it isn't a reach to say if it hits the apparatus, that it is a try, because if it goes through we are awarding 3 pts.

The rule relieves you of judgement when a live ball that is not a try goes through the basket. It doesn't instruct you on what to do when it does not go through the basket. You have decided that fed meant it to apply when it does not go through the basket. Yet fed doesn't say that. You posted that fed doesn't want us to read minds. Yet, in essence, that is what you have done. You have read fed mind to include that was not included or written.

I didn't criticize your interpretation, I only commented that your logic was faulty.

edit in - you caught me Mark. mines to mind and critize to criticize (you didn't mention that one Mark)

The FED has ruled that a ball that goes in from beyond the arc is always scored as 3 points. However, they have NEVER said that it was a try. A try is clearly defined as an attempt to throw the ball in the basket....judgement is still required on that point.

If a HS player has a good "mine", does that make him a good "prospect or" not? :D

no my logic is that since you used to have to judge whether it was a try or not to score three points, and they said score it all the time, then anything thrown at your own basket is a try.

You might want to put some limitations on that, seems most passes into the paint would qualify. That would make for some very poor shooting percentages, (edit in later) and lots of opportunities to go get the ball and dribble again.

I saw a play this past year. Team A calls a set play, one they have run previously in the game. It appears A1 was tossing an alley oop pass to A2 only the "pass" hit the rim. A2 backed off and did not touch the ball during his initial jump. When A2 gave A1 a dirty look for the bad "pass", A1 winked at A2. I find out later from the coach that A1 was trying to make the shot, rather than passing to A2. The motion of A1 was similar in this play to the previous plays, only this time A1 tried to make the basket instead of pass. It wasn't a bad pass, it was a missed try.

How do I know what is going through the mind of a kid when he is passing the ball? I realize the FED allows us to judge if it is a pass or not and make a call accordingly - see 4.15.4 C (c), but I don't think I can go wrong by calling a pass that hits the rim a try. However, in the play above I thought the kid was passing when in reality it was a try.

If this kid shots every shot in a baseball pass motion I will give him the benefit of the doubt and call it a try, but let's be serious here it is a pass and nothing more. It is not a try, how many kids regularly shot 41 foot jumpers during the game....NONE (Unless the end of a period)! Sometimes we get really carried away here and argue just for the sake for or arguing.

Because sometimes, they change their mind mid motion on what they want to do.

It doesn't seem that way in the play that was posted.

Not discussing your logic, too fluid for me.

A1 with ball, A1 tries or passes, can A1 get the ball and dribble or not? I don't recall a case play or rule including any verbiage about whether the ball hits the rim or not altering either sitch. It is all judgement (unless A1 has a dribble left).

The rule (2-Ball Location, iirc) is that a ball that hits the backboard is the same as the ball hitting the floor, except it's not a dribble if it hits a team's own bakboard. There is a case play where the ball hits the backboard -- A1 is allowed to recover the ball. A couple of years ago, the word "try" was entered into the case, in an unannounced change. The rim is not discussed in the case.