The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 07:53am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Beavercreek, Oh
Posts: 6
Send a message via AIM to udbomber
Pay close attention:

In co2ice scenario, it is not a backcourt violation because A2 touched the inbounds pass and not the defense so you are correct, it is not team control.

Pay close attention: My response was to Mark Dexter's rule of thumb for throw in backcourt violations in particular #1.

There can be a violation for A2 if he leaves the frontcourt with feet in the air on an inbounds pass and the defense touches the ball, then A2 catches ball in the air and lands in backcourt. His player location is now established immediately as frontcourt with the touch of the defense since his last spot was in the frontcourt where his feet were before going airborne.

Read your casebook.

I love this game. Alan
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 08:17am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by udbomber
There can be a violation for A2 if he leaves the frontcourt with feet in the air on an inbounds pass and the defense touches the ball, then A2 catches ball in the air and lands in backcourt. His player location is now established immediately as frontcourt with the touch of the defense since his last spot was in the frontcourt where his feet were before going airborne.

Read your casebook.
Pay close attention.

The highlighted statement is completely wrong. The player location is not established by the touch of the defense. The player location was established immediately when the player jumped. Period.

Read, learn and understand your rulebook. Rule 4-35-3.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 10:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSidbury
Sorry for beating a dead horse... just looking for more personal validation... as if the rule book cares about my personal validation ...

A1 passes the ball to A2 while established in their frontcourt, however B1 deflects the ball into the backcourt where an A player is the first to touch the ball inbounds.

So, under this scenario, and despite the B1 deflection (causing the ball to go into the backcourt), it is still a backcourt violation...? Yes or no ?

And this scenario may be in the case book (it is in the LHSAA casebook), however I am still "scratching my head" at this one.

Thanks,
Paul
Not a violation. In order to be a violation, Team A must be both the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt and the first to touch it in the backcourt. In your scenario, B was the last to touch in the frontcourt.

The one strange interpretation is that if B deflects the ball in the frontcourt and the ball never bounces in the backcourt but A catches it while in the backcourt, then it is a violation. The interpretation says that A causes the ball to go backcourt by catching it there. Many disagree with this interp, FWIW...
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 09:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 486
Been reading on this and trying to play along at home...

On a throw in, a tap by either team does not designate team control so using Dexter's points...how do you have a BC violation without team control, seems pretty striaght forward to me...

I'm echoing Ref in PA here......let me see if I am understading...
you are saying the offensive player that leaps from FC, secures the ball in the air and lands in the BC has now violated? Correct?

And the reason behind this is because:

1- his status was determined by where he took off (FC)...
2-when he possesed the ball (in the air) was when team contol was established...
3- When he lands in the BC he has control of the ball and is now standing in the BC thus BC Violation has occured.

This would be true regardless if any member of either team tapped the ball causing it go into the BC.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 07, 2007, 09:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coltdoggs
Been reading on this and trying to play along at home...

On a throw in, a tap by either team does not designate team control so using Dexter's points...how do you have a BC violation without team control, seems pretty striaght forward to me...

I'm echoing Ref in PA here......let me see if I am understading...
you are saying the offensive player that leaps from FC, secures the ball in the air and lands in the BC has now violated? Correct?

And the reason behind this is because:

1- his status was determined by where he took off (FC)...
2-when he possesed the ball (in the air) was when team contol was established...
3- When he lands in the BC he has control of the ball and is now standing in the BC thus BC Violation has occured.

This would be true regardless if any member of either team tapped the ball causing it go into the BC.
On item 3, the violation isn't because he's now standing in the BC, but because he gave the ball FC status when he possessed it in the air, and then was "first to touch" after the ball had BC status.

There is a specific exception that allows this play, IF NO ONE FROM EITHER TEAM HAS TAPPED THE BALL. Once there's a tap, the throw in and the possibility of the exception applying ends. Note however, that A2 can tip the ball into the backcourt (uncontrolled) and then retrieve it with BC status. THere was no team control established on the tip, and if A2 attains bc status before controlling the ball, it's legal. I think.

Last edited by rainmaker; Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 09:24pm.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 08, 2007, 12:08am
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
BTW - the "other" Mark's fourth point is 99.9% accurate, but not 100%. Since I'm in a nit picky mood, here's the difference. It's not to be the first to touch the ball "in the back court" but "after the ball has been in the back court".

What's the difference? The ball may go into the back court, hit an official, rebound into the front court and the subsequent touch would still count. I have also seen the extremely rare instance where the ball had some kind of backspin on it from a pass, hit in the back court and then spin back into the front court. Again, the subsequent touch would still count. OK - I've only seen that once, but I have seen the situation in which it hit an official 3 or 4 times.

Hey - I told you I was in a nit picky mood.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 08, 2007, 09:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
BTW - the "other" Mark's fourth point is 99.9% accurate, but not 100%. Since I'm in a nit picky mood, here's the difference. It's not to be the first to touch the ball "in the back court" but "after the ball has been in the back court".

What's the difference? The ball may go into the back court, hit an official, rebound into the front court and the subsequent touch would still count. I have also seen the extremely rare instance where the ball had some kind of backspin on it from a pass, hit in the back court and then spin back into the front court. Again, the subsequent touch would still count. OK - I've only seen that once, but I have seen the situation in which it hit an official 3 or 4 times.

Hey - I told you I was in a nit picky mood.
I agree with this, and I think most on this board do, but ther was, iirc, a comment from a "high rankng FED employee with close ties to the rules committee" who opined otherwise. Somewhat strangely, though, with all the BC interps issued this year, this one didn't make it.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 09, 2008, 10:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by udbomber

Pay close attention: My response was to Mark Dexter's rule of thumb for throw in backcourt violations in particular #1.

There can be a violation for A2 if he leaves the frontcourt with feet in the air on an inbounds pass and the defense touches the ball, then A2 catches ball in the air and lands in backcourt. His player location is now established immediately as frontcourt with the touch of the defense since his last spot was in the frontcourt where his feet were before going airborne.
ALAN, PAY CLOSE ATTENTION!

You wrote, "In Mark Dexter's 4 points, offense does not always have to have control (point #1)."

That is completely and totally FALSE.

Team A must ALWAYS have team control for a BC violation to occur.

In the case play that you quote, team control is established when A2 catches the ball. That's why there's a BC violation in the case play.

Here endeth the lesson.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:57pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1