Backcourt/Frontcourt Interpretation

[Zoochy]

RushmoreRef, thanks for submitting my 4 questions to your state association and to Mary Struckoff at the NFHS.
I am still having a problem with her rules interpolation to Question 4.

(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.

In this case play, the player jumps from the backcourt, secures control in the air, lands FC then BC. 9-9-3 states that for the exception, the player has to jump from the FC.

[RushmoreRef]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

RushmoreRef, thanks for submitting my 4 questions to your state association and to Mary Struckoff at the NFHS.
I am still having a problem with her rules interpolation to Question 4.

(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.

In this case play, the player jumps from the backcourt, secures control in the air, lands FC then BC. 9-9-3 states that for the exception, the player has to jump from the FC.

I see what you mean.....hopefully a clafication will come with that....I'm thinking that she is stating that any time there is no team control, a normal landing is permitted and don't know if she didn't see that the jump came from the BC or if she is saying it doesn't matter.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mary Struckoff

Answer: No violation, play on. The provision in 9-9-3 permits the play. Team control is established when A2 gains possession and lands in the backcourt.

This statement alone should disqualify her from giving "definitive" rulings.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This statement alone should disqualify her from giving "definitive" rulings.

It ain't the first one that she's screwed up. She needs to stick to editing.

[RushmoreRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It ain't the first one that she's screwed up. She needs to stick to editing.

I'm lost....anyway..think she made it clear that there is some room for interpretation with this rule and that they would look at it in committee, which is what all of us would like to have happen.

What I deduced from the email is this...a tip doesn't end the provisions of 9.9.3....what we still need to know is does this apply to a defender that jumps from the backcourt to frontcourt (doesn't say that in the rule) and is the parenthesis situations all inclusive or just examples.

Am I correct in this or are there other questions?...I'd like to know before I send my final email back to the association and eventually they will send it to her.

[Nevadaref]

Those are pretty much the three points that need addressing due to the current wording of the rule.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by RushmoreRef

what we still need to know is does this apply to a defender that jumps from the backcourt to frontcourt (doesn't say that in the rule)

???

A defender jumping from the BC to the FC is always legal.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

???

A defender jumping from the BC to the FC is always legal.

Bob, go take a look at play #4 above. The defender jumped from his backcourt, caught the ball with both feet in the air, and landed first foot down in his frontcourt and then the second foot down in his backcourt.

Do you say that is legal?