Oh My Gosh!

[Adam]

Okay, now consider this play.
A1 dribbling from BC to front court. While he's still standing in the BC, B1 reaches and swats the ball (now ending the dribble and the accompanying "three points" requirement thus giving the ball FC status while still maintaining Team A control) into the air behind A1. B1 is standing completely in the FC. A1 steps back and catches the ball before it hits the floor.

By your interp, this is a violation.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Okay, now consider this play.
A1 dribbling from BC to front court. While he's still standing in the BC, B1 reaches and swats the ball (now ending the dribble and the accompanying "three points" requirement thus giving the ball FC status while still maintaining Team A control) into the air behind A1. B1 is standing completely in the FC. A1 steps back and catches the ball before it hits the floor.

By your interp, this is a violation.

Is it though? Team A never had TC in the FC, a requirement of 9.9.1....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Is it though? Team A never had TC in the FC, a requirement of 9.9.1....

Is it a requirement?
Team has control.
Ball gains FC status.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Is it a requirement?
Team has control.
Ball gains FC status.

Yeah I suppose you do have team control, albeit during an interrupted dribble when tipped...and you do have FC "status" for the ball...even more reason why this interp is BS....

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Yeah I suppose you do have team control, albeit during an interrupted dribble when tipped...and you do have FC "status" for the ball...even more reason why this interp is BS....

Nevermind, complete brainfart...what happens when you try to immerse yourself in the text of the rules...you are correct, this would be a violation as well and another reason why this interp stinks..

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Is it a requirement?
Team has control.
Ball gains FC status.

Although the more I think about it, there is no team control in the FC in your example. I think the way the rule is written, there needs to be team control with both the team A players and the ball in the FC before you can have a BC violation..we at least have this much in this bogus interp...I still think this interp is BS, but I don't think we can extrapolate it to this point...JMHO..

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Okay, now consider this play.
A1 dribbling from BC to front court. While he's still standing in the BC, B1 reaches and swats the ball (now ending the dribble and the accompanying "three points" requirement thus giving the ball FC status while still maintaining Team A control) into the air behind A1. B1 is standing completely in the FC. A1 steps back and catches the ball before it hits the floor.

By your interp, this is a violation.

No, my interp requires Team A to have control of the ball in the FC. Your twist on the situation doesn't provide that.

Look, I'll agree that there's a gray area around the "last to touch or be touched in the frontcourt" and that part could be construed as missing from the requirements needed to call a BC violation. But, I can't bring myself to say that B2 caused the ball to go in the BC, may have helped it along but the ball still had FC status when A2 caught the ball.

[Nevadaref]

And in Snaqs play Team A has team control and the ball has FC status after B2 batted it up into the air. So by the new interp, it is a BC violation when A2 catches the ball without letting it bounce.

PS kbilla this is NOT an interrupted dribble. The dribble has ended when B2 knocked the ball away.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

And in Snaqs play Team A has team control and the ball has FC status after B2 batted it up into the air. So by the new interp, it is a BC violation when A2 catches the ball without letting it bounce.

PS kbilla this is NOT an interrupted dribble. The dribble has ended when B2 knocked the ball away.

9-1-1 says... A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt...

Notice, there's no "and" in the rule.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BLydic

9-1-1 says... A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt...

Notice, there's no "and" in the rule.

We're not talking about the rule. We're talking about the new interp.

I've already stated that I believe that the new interp is poor and does not mesh with the text of the rule.

My point is that you are trying to have it both ways. You wish to call one play by the text of the rule and another according to the new interp. That doesn't work.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BLydic

9-1-1 says... A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt...

Notice, there's no "and" in the rule.

The ball has status of FC or BC.
Team control continues once it's been established.

Once team control has been established, and the ball gains FC status, there is now team control in the FC.

There is no requirement for Player control to be established in the FC.

Otherwise, a pass from A1 (in the BC) to A2 (in the FC) that is never caught by A2 but instead gets muffed back to A1 would not be a violation. But it is.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The ball has status of FC or BC.
Team control continues once it's been established.

Once team control has been established, and the ball gains FC status, there is now team control in the FC.

There is no requirement for Player control to be established in the FC.

Otherwise, a pass from A1 (in the BC) to A2 (in the FC) that is never caught by A2 but instead gets muffed back to A1 would not be a violation. But it is.

But again the million $ question is how are you going to call it if it happens? I don't remember ever having this happen, but it seems so routine of a non-call, I actually probably did but let it go at the time...what are you going to do now?

[Adam]

I'm calling my last play (post 47) a violation. It meets all the requirements by rule and interp.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The ball has status of FC or BC.
Team control continues once it's been established.

Once team control has been established, and the ball gains FC status, there is now team control in the FC.

There is no requirement for Player control to be established in the FC.

Otherwise, a pass from A1 (in the BC) to A2 (in the FC) that is never caught by A2 but instead gets muffed back to A1 would not be a violation. But it is.

Same play setup, but change A2 to B2 and stipulate that A1 catches the rebound without the ball bouncing in the backcourt.

What do you call now?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Same play setup, but change A2 to B2 and stipulate that A1 catches the rebound without the ball bouncing in the backcourt.

What do you call now?

By rule or by interp?