Backcourt violation or not?

[KGB]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Since there is no team control on a throw in, then the answer is no. This is a legal play- 9-9-1

The throw in is over when B1 deflected the ball.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by KGB

The throw in is over when B1 deflected the ball.

Hey go to your case book and look at page 72 (9.9.1 Situation D) I was a little hasty in my answer. They need to word this a little bit better and determine what a legal touch is. I guess a deflection is a legal touch....

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Hey go to your case book and look at page 72 (9.9.1 Situation D) I was a little hasty in my answer. They need to word this a little bit better and determine what a legal touch is. I guess a deflection is a legal touch....

illegal touch = kick

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

illegal touch = kick

Or batting with a fist?

[bannind]

It is not a violation as described in the first post. Yes a deflection or tap ends the throwin, but it does not establish front/backcourt possession.

I believe the situation that will cause the most problems, because of the clarification of when a throwin ends, is with momentum causing a player who catches a ball with one foot in the front court and momentum carries them into the back court. While legal if during a throwin, if the ball has been deflected (in a manner that is considered a legal touch) and A1 gains control of the ball with one foot in the front court and momentum takes them into the back court - at that point there is a violation. That is because the consideration to allow a players momentum to legally take them into the back court only exists during a throwin. If the ball has been legally touched the throwin is over and that consideration no longer exists.

But in reference to the original posters question - there would be no violation.

but that is just my reading on the rules.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by bannind

But in reference to the original posters question - there would be no violation.

When the player catches the ball while airborne, he establishes player control, which also establishes team control. Also, since the player left the frontcourt, he gives the ball frontcourt status when he establishes player control. Then he lands in the backcourt. This is a violation.

The only time this is not a violation is during a throw-in, as it is an allowed exception to the rule. Since B tipped the ball, ending the throw-in, the exception no longer applies.

[Vinski]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

When the player catches the ball while airborne, he establishes player control, which also establishes team control. Also, since the player left the frontcourt, he gives the ball frontcourt status when he establishes player control. Then he lands in the backcourt. This is a violation.

The only time this is not a violation is during a throw-in, as it is an allowed exception to the rule. Since B tipped the ball, ending the throw-in, the exception no longer applies.

Very well put, jdw.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bannind

It is not a violation as described in the first post. Yes a deflection or tap ends the throwin, but it does not establish front/backcourt possession.

I believe the situation that will cause the most problems, because of the clarification of when a throwin ends, is with momentum causing a player who catches a ball with one foot in the front court and momentum carries them into the back court. While legal if during a throwin, if the ball has been deflected (in a manner that is considered a legal touch) and A1 gains control of the ball with one foot in the front court and momentum takes them into the back court - at that point there is a violation. That is because the consideration to allow a players momentum to legally take them into the back court only exists during a throwin. If the ball has been legally touched the throwin is over and that consideration no longer exists.

But in reference to the original posters question - there would be no violation.

but that is just my reading on the rules.

Don't take this the wrong way but.....do you even bother to read what everybody else is posting?

Bob Jenkins has already said above that the the NFHS posted the correct ruling on their web site. The FED ruling is that it IS a violation. How can you then say that it's your reading of the rules when you obviously didn't bother to read the rules.

http:..http://www.nfhs.org/web/2007/10/2007...s_interpr.aspx
See Situation #6. Note that it's the exact play described in the original post of this thread.

Also note that is probably the third or fourth thread about the exact same play. The ruling ain't gonna change, folks.

[bannind]

I do stand corrected - I was not getting any response from the NFHS.org website and I had left the fed books at the office, thus I could not verify for myself.

I don't take it the wrong way - and have a great Thanksgiving Jurassic (and everyone else).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bannind

It is not a violation as described in the first post. Yes a deflection or tap ends the throwin, but it does not establish front/backcourt possession.

I believe the situation that will cause the most problems, because of the clarification of when a throwin ends, is with momentum causing a player who catches a ball with one foot in the front court and momentum carries them into the back court. While legal if during a throwin, if the ball has been deflected (in a manner that is considered a legal touch) and A1 gains control of the ball with one foot in the front court and momentum takes them into the back court - at that point there is a violation. That is because the consideration to allow a players momentum to legally take them into the back court only exists during a throwin. If the ball has been legally touched the throwin is over and that consideration no longer exists.

But in reference to the original posters question - there would be no violation.

but that is just my reading on the rules.

Actually, the misunderstanding evident in this post is worse than even JR thought.

Bannind, please allow to me to attempt to help you a bit. You are missing a key point.
The three exceptions to the backcourt violation are all for AIRBORNE players. In order to be eligible for one of the exceptions, the player must receive the ball while BOTH feet are off the floor. If one foot is touching the court at the time when the player catches the ball, then none of the exceptions can apply and the play is governed by the normal rule.

So in addition to the new clarification making it crystal clear that the play posted in the OP is indeed a backcourt violation (and I had always called it that way), what you posted above and I highlighted in red is also a violation and has been for a long time. There is even a case book play stating exactly such. Here it is:

9.9.1 SITUATION A: A1 catches the throw-in pass with one foot on the floor in A's frontcourt and the other foot not touching the floor. The non-pivot foot then comes down in A's backcourt. RULING: Violation. Team control is established in A's frontcourt when A1 catches the throw-in pass. The violation occurs when A1 subsequently touches the backcourt with the non-pivot foot. (4-12-6; 9-9-3)