Backcourt ruling (NHFS rules)
 

I had a little league game and I called back court violation. Team "A" coach question my call and ask me about the 3 point rule. He thought in order to be backcourt that all 3 point (both feets and the ball) has to touch the front court to established frontcourt status.

Here is the play.

Player A1 inbounds the ball (player A1 is inbounding from sideline in the backcourt) to player A2 in the frontcourt. Player A2 has not dribble the ball and decide to pass the ball back to player A1 in the backcourt.

Ruling is this backcourt violation?

Now is the 3 point rule mean crossover the midcourt line or all 3 point has to touch the frontcourt to establish front court status?

If A2 has both feet and the ball in the frontcourt then violation....If A2 was straddling the line with both feet with possession of the ball, then OK

The three point concept only applies to a dribbler moving from BC to FC. If a player holds the ball without dribbling, the two feet are all that matter.
IOW, you got the call right.

What if the player is standing on only one foot? :D

Just pointing out that there is no requirement that both feet must touch in the front court, only that front court status must be attained.

I never said both feet had to be down, only that their respective positions were all that matter if a player is holding the ball. :)
1. One foot down and one foot up means your position is determined by whether any part of the down foot is in the BC or not.
2. Two feet down means your position is determined by whether any part of either foot is in the BC or not.

I know that YOU know that, but the OP doesn't, and I didn't want him to think that there was a two points rule of some kind. ;)

Also...it's the NFHS. ;)

This made me think of an interesting situation. What if a player is dribbling from the backcourt to the frontcourt while hopping on one foot? Does the three point rule apply? I would say, no, but it seems that it is within the rules if after a couple of hops in the frontcourt, he were to return to the backcourt.

No brainer, totally back court.

This is when you would apply the spirit and intent of the rules. IMO, two hops = two feet down. Same concept as when a player lifts his pivot foot and hops on the other foot without dribbling. You still call a travel.

Gee if that "hoppyfoot" wasn't his <b>pivot</b> foot, he could legally "hop" on it from the backcourt right to his basket while <b>holding</b> the ball. No need to even dribble, right?

That's within the rules too, isn't it?:D

Uh, oh...here we go again...

(How's that handbasket of yours?)

Bad Woddy....

Bad, bad Woddy......:D

About five years ago, I designed a play in which a player who is dribbling in the backcourt begins hopping on one foot and then proceeds to dribble into the FT lane in the frontcourt, turn around and return to his backcourt. THe player dribbles and hops on the same foot the entire time. I posted it on this very forum. It was an absurd play thought up specifically to test one's understanding of the backcourt rule. The answer is that this is not a violation of the backcourt rule, nor is it a travel. If the player dribbles the whole time, then traveling is impossible, and since the second foot never touches the frontcourt the player does not achieve frontcourt status, thus a backcourt violation is also impossible. The official must be sharp enough to continue the ten second backcourt count though! :)

you designed this play...how can guys like Bobby Knight and coach K continue working with a basketball mind like yours being wasted not getting a chance to execute this play in real life. shame on the system and shame on any ref who calls this a bc violation.

pretty much shame all around :eek: :rolleyes: :D :p