I really hate to beat a dead horse, but I never claimed to be real quick. " One more time for the slow guy huh fella's".
If A1 inbounds the ball under A's own basket the ball is tipped by A2 and goes into the back court and then A2 recovers the ball is this a violation?
Mark Dexter has a 4 step formula for determining this, but I was unable to locate this in previous posts. Thanks in advance!!!!!

Not my list
 

This is not my formula, just one that I have seen dozens of times before on this and other internet discussion boards.

Here are the four points. If any are missing, it's not a backcourt violation:
(1) Team A must have control.
(2) The ball must obtain frontcourt status.
(3) A must be the first to touch the ball before it goes into the backcourt.
(4) A must be the first to touch the ball in the backcourt.

In this case, A never had control (no team control on a throw-in) so it is not a violation.

Thanks Mark, I justy found the post and even the very same stich, I'm relieved I made the right call. And it was actually bballrefs list. Thanks again!!

Throw-in - backcourt violation without taking possesion
 

In Mark Dexter's 4 points, offense does not always have to have control (point #1). Yes it is true, offense can juggle ball across the line and not have control but if the defense touches the ball on the throw-in, the throw-in ends and ball, now touching offense and going into backcourt , and now being touched by offense first is a backcourt violation.

You Make the Call!!!Advanced Situation: A team is awarded a throw-in at half court. The inbounds pass is deflected by the defense and the offensive guard, jumping in the air from his frontcourt, grabs the deflected ball while in the air and lands in his backcourt. You make the call!!!

Ruling: If you called nothing because no team control was established until the ball was caught in the air and the first landing of the feet was in the backcourt, you are incorrect. If you called a backcourt violation because the throw-in ends when it is legally touched by the defense, you are correct. The airborne guard gains player and team control in the air after having left the floor from his frontcourt therefore having frontcourt status. As soon as the guard lands in his backcourt, he has committed a backcourt violation.

Rule 9.9.3: A player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in) may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. (Casebook Situation)
Note: The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball.

Not true. No team control in frontcourt. No violation.

Sigh.......

Completely wrong.

Lah me.....:rolleyes:

Yah I remember from one of the backcourt posts that no it would not be a backcourt violation. If A1 shot the ball, off rim, then a2 taps it out and it goes to the backcourt and then a3 grabs it would that be backcourt? I would again say no but I'm not positive. And would it matter if the tap is intentional like a controlled tap. A tap pass.

Where is this reference from?

Also, don't you see the difference between this sitch and the OP??

Nice! Another appearance of "Lah me..." That's the JR we know! :)

And love......

http://d21c.com/AnnesPlace/Bears/PoohRef.gif

New casebook scenario this year
 

Read the new casebook scenario this year with the asterik.

General rule is: there is no backcourt violation on throw-ins but all backcourt rules still apply meaning you can throw the ball into the backcourt on a throw-in after being in the frontcourt but you have to watch player location on the throw-in.

If player receives pass in the air from his leaving his feet in the frontcourt last and the defensive player touches the inbounds pass, you now immediately have to go with player location at that moment which in this case is the receiving player being in the frontcourt, receives inbounds pass and now lands in the backcourt for a violation.

A shot off the rim touching the offensive man and into the backcourt shows no possession yet so legal to retrieve ball in backcourt.

Same for an inbounds pass from baseline with throw lofting to the half-court line where a receiving offensive player is not sure where his location is so he jumps and tips the ball into the backcourt making it all legal with no possession. But if touched by defense on inbounds pass, it ends and player location is immediately established. Mid-court immediately becomes an out of bounds line for offense.
I love this game.
Alan

You may love this game, but you're still wrong.
We know about the new play rulings. You are still wrong.

Do you want me to explain why to you or shall we let you live in ignorant bliss? :D

You are so wrong it's hard to decide where to start.

It doesn't matter who touches the ball. If no team control is established, the "offensive" team can recover the ball in their backcourt any time.

You're getting confused about two very different scenarios.

If a player tips a throw-in pass, then an offensive player catches the ball while airborne from the frontcourt he/she creates player and team control with frontcourt status at that time. When he/she lands in the backcourt, it's a backcourt violation.

The only time a player can jump from his/her frontcourt, catch the ball, and land in his/her backcourt is during a throw-in. That is the 9.3.3 exception. It has nothing to do with recovering a ball that has backcourt status.

In your example above, team control was established. When A1 leaps from front court and secures control in the air, player and team control is established at that point in time (Point 1). Beacause A1 is in the air and lept from the front court and has touched the ball, the ball has front court status (point 2). A1 is holding the ball as he lands in back court (points 3 and 4 are now satisfied). Now we can call the back court violation.

Good job. It's not often that someone can resurrect a 6-year old thread and be so wrong about it.

Speaking of being wrong...:D

What are you missing? ;)

http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...es/roflmao.gif

Didn't even notice the date of the OP.

Well darn. I'm just making a regular horse's behind of myself today.

The other time a player can jump from his/her frontcourt, catch the ball while airborne and land in his/her backcourt is a player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball, in addition to during a throw-in).

*Sigh*...this has been a long morning already. :D

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

Pay close attention.

What you wrote above is <b>NOT</b> and <b>NEVER</b> has been a violation.

Read your rulebook. Specifically read NFHS rule 9-9-1. Then find somebody to explain it to you. Ask them if they can find anywhere in your statement where team control had been established in the frontcourt. Ask them to explain to you that merely <b>"touching"</b> a ball does <b>NOT</b> establish player/team control.

You're trying to apply principles from rule 9-9-3 that just aren't applicable. Why aren't they applicable? Pay close attention. Because in 9-9-3 and the irrelevant case book play that you cited, team control <b>WAS</b> established in the frontcourt.

Lah me........:rolleyes:

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 <b>immediately</b> when the player jumped. Period.

Read, learn and understand your rulebook. Rule 4-35-3.

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...

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.

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. :p

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.

Read Casebook Scenarios 9.9.3. New scenario for this year explaning when the throw in ends.

Alan

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.

For those of you who cannot navigate through the rulebook/casebook and put this scenario to rest, read page 72 of the NFHS Casebook (2007-2008) and read 9.9.1 Situation D. At the end of the scenario it then says to reference Rule 9.9.3 which means you now go to the NFHS Rulebook (2007-2008) on Page 58. I hope we all can sleep well now after reading and educating ourselves more of how truly complicated the throw-in can actually be in this wonderful game of basketball. Stay on your toes and keep your game sharp.
Bomber

Alan, pay close attention. You don't know what you're talking about. You're throwing in meaningless and irrelevant cites trying to justify previous incorrect statements. That ain't gonna work here; there's too many people posting here that actually know the correct rules and rulings. It's that simple.

First you resurrect a 6-year old thread, and are wrong.

then it sits for a month until you resurrect it again. Give it up.