Backcourt??

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

This "advantage" is provided to players whose team is not in control; during a throwin, on defense, and during a jump ball. A player whose team is not in control may jump from his front court, secure the ball while airborne, and land normally in the backcourt.

I am not addressing you specifically Mr. Snaqwells, just using your post.

Is this "advantage" available to either team following a try?

[RushmoreRef]

Great I learned something...now with the inbounds play. It all depends on the status of the player (airborne or not airborne)....got it now...if airborne they can land normally, if not airborne then the court status is just like anything else, in and out of bounds, behind the arc or in front etc....

Got it...thanks.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by RushmoreRef

Great I learned something...now with the inbounds play. It all depends on the status of the player (airborne or not airborne)....got it now...if airborne they can land normally, if not airborne then the court status is just like anything else, in and out of bounds, behind the arc or in front etc....

Got it...thanks.

Think of it this way. FC and BC are only in existence when there's team control. When a defensive player is airborne, and catches the ball, he didn't have team control when he left the floor, so there wasn't any FC when he left the floor, so he's just establishing team control when he lands. He hasn't carried the ball from FC to BC, because he didn't have FC status when he left the floor.

And you can apply the same logic to the throw-in. No team control until the player lands, so no FC or BC status until the player lands.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

I am not addressing you specifically Mr. Snaqwells, just using your post.

Is this "advantage" available to either team following a try?

This is a point of contention. I'm going off memory here, but the rule states, "a player whose team is not in control (on defense, during a throwin, or during a jump ball)…may jump and…."

Whether this applies to a player on a shot depends on whether you think this freedom extends after the throwin ends but before player/team control is established. The debate is whether the examples in parentheses are all inclusive, or meant as mere examples of when a player's team isn't in control.
Example: A1 releases the pass on a throwin, which is then tipped into the air by A2. A3 jumps from the FC to secure the ball and lands in the BC. Here is where some officials differ on the interepretation of this rule.

[RushmoreRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

This is a point of contention. I'm going off memory here, but the rule states, "a player whose team is not in control (on defense, during a throwin, or during a jump ball)…may jump and…."

Whether this applies to a player on a shot depends on whether you think this freedom extends after the throwin ends but before player/team control is established. The debate is whether the examples in parentheses are all inclusive, or meant as mere examples of when a player's team isn't in control.
Example: A1 releases the pass on a throwin, which is then tipped into the air by A2. A3 jumps from the FC to secure the ball and lands in the BC. Here is where some officials differ on the interepretation of this rule.

I'd have to say that a tip doesn't mean team control and is therefore not a violation....we discussed this play at length with 6 officials after a tournament game and we came to that consensus....

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

No, don't put words in for me. I just didn't include the airborne portion in my post. Scrapper has it 100%.

I didn't put words in your mouth. I just asked you a question. You wrote, "If the player had control of the ball while in the front court and then went into the back I would call a violation." You say nothing about him being airborne or on the floor, so we're just supposed to assume you know the difference?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by RushmoreRef

I'd have to say that a tip doesn't mean team control and is therefore not a violation....we discussed this play at length with 6 officials after a tournament game and we came to that consensus....

No one argues that team control exists at this point. The debate is whether the "exception" continues once the throwin is over. IOW, is the exception granted every time there's no team control, or only during the three specified examples.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No one argues that team control exists at this point. The debate is whether the "exception" continues once the throwin is over. IOW, is the exception granted every time there's no team control, or only during the three specified examples.

Snaqwells - you're right that the throw-in has ended in this situation. However, no team control has been established. Therefore, no violation - no matter where the player takes off from and lands.

Think of what happens on a jump ball. Just because a jumper touches the ball doesn't mean that the backcourt exception has ended. Nor does it end when a non-jumper grabs the ball, as long as he's in the air (even though the jump ball would end at that point).

[RushmoreRef]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Snaqwells - you're right that the throw-in has ended in this situation. However, no team control has been established. Therefore, no violation - no matter where the player takes off from and lands.

Think of what happens on a jump ball. Just because a jumper touches the ball doesn't mean that the backcourt exception has ended. Nor does it end when a non-jumper grabs the ball, as long as he's in the air (even though the jump ball would end at that point).

I know the throw-in is over when touched on the court, but I mentioned "team control" because there can't be a violation when team control was never established.

I threw this out before a college game...same exact scenario as Snaqwells stated with the tip....and we know in college there is team control on a thrown in....but the exception of the backcourt violation on a thrown in takes precedence there as well, according to the officials I was with that evening....meaning no violation on a tip by A into the backcourt which is then recovered by A.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by RushmoreRef

I know the throw-in is over when touched on the court, but I mentioned "team control" because there can't be a violation when team control was never established.

The problem with that is that the rule says there's no violation for a player whose team is not in control during a jump ball or throw-in.

Since the touch ends the throw-in, some people claim that the exception is no long valid.

[RushmoreRef]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

The problem with that is that the rule says there's no violation for a player whose team is not in control during a jump ball or throw-in.

Since the touch ends the throw-in, some people claim that the exception is no long valid.

I understand what you're saying but how are you going to call a backcourt violation if there is no team-control established. What about below...

What if A1 (inbounding the ball) throws it toward A2 in As backcourt. B1, playing defense, bats the ball into As frontcourt and it is retrieved by B2....according to the other posts, no violation on B because they aren't penalized for their spot on the floor.

If the reverse happens, inbounds to A2 in As frontcourt and batted to As backcourt and A2 retrieves? Some are saying that's a violation?

These scenarios don't involve airborne players like this post started out but both are making point about how I think the inbounding portion of this rule means until their is team control....which maybe should be clarified in the rules/case book.

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I didn't put words in your mouth. I just asked you a question. You wrote, "If the player had control of the ball while in the front court and then went into the back I would call a violation." You say nothing about him being airborne or on the floor, so we're just supposed to assume you know the difference?

Agreed you didn't. My apology. Your sarcasm and insinuation that I am a complete dolt who knows nothing about the game or officiating is duely noted. If I have given any indication in previous posts that I deserved this then so be it. I don't post false information or missleading interpretations, and as I noted above did not clarify my OP very well.

Thanks

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Snaqwells - you're right that the throw-in has ended in this situation. However, no team control has been established. Therefore, no violation - no matter where the player takes off from and lands.

Think of what happens on a jump ball. Just because a jumper touches the ball doesn't mean that the backcourt exception has ended. Nor does it end when a non-jumper grabs the ball, as long as he's in the air (even though the jump ball would end at that point).

Mark, I agree with you. I'm only saying there is a significantly sized group of officials who don't. The argument is that the parenthetical items in the allowance are all-inclusive, and that the allowance no longer applies once the throwin or jump ball is over, even if player control has not yet been established.
Adam

[RushmoreRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Mark, I agree with you. I'm only saying there is a significantly sized group of officials who don't. The argument is that the parenthetical items in the allowance are all-inclusive, and that the allowance no longer applies once the throwin or jump ball is over, even if player control has not yet been established.
Adam

So what do you make of #26......I think you and I and other on here say no violation....does the other group feel that both are violations...???

[Adam]

Originally Posted by RushmoreRef

I understand what you're saying but how are you going to call a backcourt violation if there is no team-control established. What about below...

The argument goes:
Once the ball is tipped, the throwin is over, so the exception no longer applies. Therefore, once A2 catches the ball, he has established player control. If his last position was in the FC, then that's where the ball is. By landing in the BC, he commits a violation.

Originally Posted by RushmoreRef

What if A1 (inbounding the ball) throws it toward A2 in As backcourt. B1, playing defense, bats the ball into As frontcourt and it is retrieved by B2....according to the other posts, no violation on B because they aren't penalized for their spot on the floor.

If the reverse happens, inbounds to A2 in As frontcourt and batted to As backcourt and A2 retrieves? Some are saying that's a violation?

This isn't a violation because team/player control was not established until the player is holding the ball in the backcourt. In the debated scenario, PC gets established by an airborne player who was last in the FC but lands in the BC. There is an allowance in the rules for this, but the debate is over when that allowance ends.