Keady was torqued!

[bard]

But what's new???

Illinois at Purdue last night. Loose ball in PU's frontcourt. John Allison dives for the ball. As he's falling, he gets one hand on the ball, and in one motion heaves it towards division line. Purdue guard leaps from backcourt, catches the ball, and then lands in the frontcourt. Official calls over & back, and Keady turns purple.

I felt the call was excellent as Allison had gained sufficient control of the ball to direct where he wanted it to go, and the guard definitely caught the ball before he landed in the frontcourt.

[mick]

Yup.
Sounds like Keady embarassed himself.

[RecRef]

Originally posted by bard


I felt the call was excellent as Allison had gained sufficient control of the ball to direct where he wanted it to go, and the guard definitely caught the ball before he landed in the frontcourt.

I did not see the game so I know not of what I speak.

Control on a throw back like this is the hardest call for me to make on the court. I have a hard time rationalizing that this is control of the ball. This, whether or not, he is on the floor or in the air and going out of bounds trying to save the ball.

[Bart Tyson]

loose ball is a loose term. Is it loose because of rebounding, interupted dribble, deflected pass, def. taps out of hands of off. holding the ball? Point being if we have team control, it doesn't matter if he had control.

[mick]

Originally posted by RecRef

I did not see the game so I know not of what I speak.

Control on a throw back like this is the hardest call for me to make on the court. I have a hard time rationalizing that this is control of the ball. This, whether or not, he is on the floor or in the air and going out of bounds trying to save the ball.

Recref,
We have to draw our own lines on this judgement call.

Through our individual experiences we learn to judge the differences between touching, batting, holding.
For my rationalization, if a player "throws" the ball (that is, directs the ball in a desirable direction), then there is a point (and maybe only briefly) at which the player is, in fact, holding the ball and thus has control... whether it is with one hand or both hands.
mick

[bard]

When this ball was loose, it was indeed loose with no team control. The Purdue center got his big paw on the ball and tossed the ball towards his teammate as he was hitting the floor. In other words, it was more than a tap. I would say he "palmed" the ball.

It was great hussle, which was why Purdue finally won a Big 10 game. However, I still say the official got this one right.

[mick]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
loose ball is a loose term. Is it loose because of rebounding, interupted dribble, deflected pass, def. taps out of hands of off. holding the ball? Point being if we have team control, it doesn't matter if he had control.

Bart,
Good point.
I wonder which team had control before the throw.
mick

[bard]

As I recall, although I don't remember exactly, I believe the situation was either a loose rebound or a Purdue player lost the ball on a drive to the basket. At any rate, I do recall that the ball had been batted by a couple of different players before the "pass."

[Bart Tyson]

Bard, you have two different ruling between the drive to the basket and a rebound. loosing the ball on a drive doesn't loose team control. It didn't see the game but i'm going to guess this was a rebound. I don't believe the official would miss this one.

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by bard
When this ball was loose, it was indeed loose with no team control. The Purdue center got his big paw on the ball and tossed the ball towards his teammate as he was hitting the floor. In other words, it was more than a tap. I would say he "palmed" the ball.

It was great hussle, which was why Purdue finally won a Big 10 game. However, I still say the official got this one right.

There are only two situations in which there is no team control, after shot or during inbounds (before a player establishes control over the ball). So the situation in which this occurred is very important, and the fact that you can't remember it means that you did not look at potentially the most important part of the play.

If Purdue had established team control (player driving to basket) and lost physical custody of the ball as it bounced around loose, it is not relevant whether or not they appeared to have control of ball. Until Illinois gains control or a shot goes up, Purdue retains team control, regardless of an apparent lack of control due to loose ball. Loose ball does not mean loss of team control, but merely loss of player control. Team control remains until the other team establishes control, the ball becomes dead, or a shot goes up.

If the player was indeeed driving and lost ball, we have Purdue team control, ball in Purdue's front court, Purdue last to touch front court, and Purdue first to touch after ball goes backcourt (because Purdue player still had backcourt position until landing frontcourt). Clear backcourt violation.

Now if team control had yet to be established after a shot, then it is a much more difficult call and the referee must have ruled that the Purdue player established control while tapping the ball backcourt. On a tapped ball, we have seen the amount of controversy this can cause among referees on other threads. It's not surprising to me that Keady would go nuts if they made this ruling, because it is a marginal call at best.

My bet is that the first incident occurred, and that Keady 1) did not know that on a loose ball his team retained team control, 2) did not believe his player was backcourt, or 3) just felt that it was a close enough call that he needed to ride the official (some coaches believe they plant that seed of doubt so that the next close call goes their way).

[Bart Tyson]

All conferences i work the supervisors say No player control until the player possess the ball with both hands or clearly dribbles. batting the ball to the floor to gain control is not a dribble.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by RecRef
Control on a throw back like this is the hardest call for me to make on the court. I have a hard time rationalizing that this is control of the ball. This, whether or not, he is on the floor or in the air and going out of bounds trying to save the ball.

Control on the throw does not matter!!! Here are the four BC violation requirements:

(1) Team A must have control.
(2) The ball must have FC status.
>>I'm assuming these two were met, as I did not see the game<<
(3) A is the last to touch the ball before it goes into the backcourt.
>>Definately happened here. This is no different the situation where B1 (in his BC/A's FC) taps the ball off of A1, the ball goes into A's BC, and A2 touches the ball.<<
(4) A is the first to touch the ball after it goes into the backcourt.

[w_sohl]

Go Boilermakers!!!!

Correct call by the official IMO. But my beloved Boilers won anyway.

Keady always has a scowl like that, happy, mad, sad, it is all the same.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
All conferences i work the supervisors say No player control until the player possess the ball with both hands or clearly dribbles. batting the ball to the floor to gain control is not a dribble.

Bart, this is true, but irrelevant to Hawk Coach's point. What he explained was that you don't have to have player control in order for there to be team control.

Once player control is established, that player's team has "team control" until either: a) a shot is taken, b) a player from the other team gains control, or c) play is stopped by the officials.

So in the play that we're discussing, perhaps the Purdue player had control (that gives Purdue team control), then lost the ball or it was tapped away by the defense (no control by the defense, so it's still Purdue team control), then was tapped into the backcourt by a Purdue player (still Purdue team control, even if the player who tapped it didn't actually have control), then a Purdue player was first to touch it in the backcourt. Now we have a violation.

Team control can exist without player control, and only team control (not player control) is necessary for a backcourt violation.

The elements of a backcourt violation are (once again):

1) Team Control
2) Frontcourt status
3) Offensive player last to touch the ball
4) Offensive player first to touch the ball in backcourt.

Did I get that list right?

Chuck

[mick]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
All conferences i work the supervisors say No player control until the player possess the ball with both hands or clearly dribbles. batting the ball to the floor to gain control is not a dribble.

Bart,
Those must be "small-hand conferences".
That determination reduces the need for officials to have to make the control judgement.
Do you think that is a proper application?
mick