2 strange situations in the same game

[ditttoo]

Just want to be clear, here. "All three" (ball, left foot, right foot) do NOT have to be in front court to establish front court. "All three" ONLY applies when the ball is being dribbled. Otherwise, all that is required to establish front court is the pivot foot. According to the post, both feet were established in the front court - so I have a back court violation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ditttoo

Just want to be clear, here. "All three" (ball, left foot, right foot) do NOT have to be in front court to establish front court. "All three" ONLY applies when the ball is being dribbled. Otherwise, all that is required to establish front court is the pivot foot. According to the post, both feet were established in the front court - so I have a back court violation.

Then in that case, just to be clear, you should revisit the rules book.
You are mistaken.
The position of the feet does not matter. What matters is that this player does have some part of the body touching the backcourt, so the player has backcourt status.

4-35-2 . . . When a player is touching the backcourt, out of bounds or the three-point line, the player is located in backcourt, out of bounds,or inside the three-point line, respectively.

[ditttoo]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Then in that case, just to be clear, you should revisit the rules book.
You are mistaken.
The position of the feet does not matter. What matters is that this player does have some part of the body touching the backcourt, so the player has backcourt status.

4-35-2 . . . When a player is touching the backcourt, out of bounds or the three-point line, the player is located in backcourt, out of bounds,or inside the three-point line, respectively.

So then, if the player were to pick up one foot and leave the pivot foot in the front court, then touch the raised foot into the back court - you're not going to call back court?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ditttoo

So then, if the player were to pick up one foot and leave the pivot foot in the front court, then touch the raised foot into the back court - you're not going to call back court?

Not while the player's backside is firmly planted on the floor in the backcourt.

What does the action which you describe have to do with the play under discussion?

[ditttoo]

Situation described points out that the establishment of front court status depends on the pivot foot being established in the front court and nothing to do with the backside of the player being in the back court. BOTH feet were in the front court so one must surely be the pivot foot; pivot foot in the front court so front court status is established.

Replies were referencing "three points" in determining front/back court status - since the referenced play did not involve a dribble, the point is that "three points" (ball, right foot, left foot) applies only in situations involving a dribble, which the referenced play did not.

In my last post, the point is that it is the pivot foot, and nothing else, which establishes front court/back court status when there is no active dribble.

[Adam]

If the player gains possession of the ball while sitting down, this player does NOT have a pivot foot.

And pivot foot in the front court does not necessarily mean front court status. There is an exception that could have the pivot foot in the front court and the player with back court status.

[ditttoo]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If the player gains possession of the ball while sitting down, this player does NOT have a pivot foot.

And pivot foot in the front court does not necessarily mean front court status. There is an exception that could have the pivot foot in the front court and the player with back court status.

With both feet on the floor, one MUST be considered the pivot foot (that's why the jump stop does not allow a player to initiate a dribble under certain circumstances). With both feet on the floor in the front court, and without a dribble, you have front court status is the point. I know of no exceptions; interesting play situation which I hope I don't encounter; I've got a back court violation and would not want to explain to the coach (or anyone else) that there is no violation due to the fact that even with both feet in the front court the ball was hanging over the back court and/or the backside of the player was still in the back court.

[JoeT]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If the player gains possession of the ball while sitting down, this player does NOT have a pivot foot.

Pivot cheek?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ditttoo

Situation described points out that the establishment of front court status depends on the pivot foot being established in the front court and nothing to do with the backside of the player being in the back court. BOTH feet were in the front court so one must surely be the pivot foot; pivot foot in the front court so front court status is established.

Replies were referencing "three points" in determining front/back court status - since the referenced play did not involve a dribble, the point is that "three points" (ball, right foot, left foot) applies only in situations involving a dribble, which the referenced play did not.

In my last post, the point is that it is the pivot foot, and nothing else, which establishes front court/back court status when there is no active dribble.

I don't know where you got that method, but it is not correct. It may work in the vast majority of circumstances, but since it is not the rule, it will not work for all situations.
Two situations for which your "rule of pivot" doesn't work are:
1. the player is not standing
2. a player catches the ball while airborne and while his action is covered by one of the three exceptions, so he is permitted to make a normal landing without respect for which foot comes down first. If the first foot comes down in the frontcourt and the second in the backcourt, the player's pivot foot is the one in the front court, but he has backcourt status per the rules.
If he lifts his foot in the fc, the pivot, and puts it back down in the fc, he has travelled.
Now you can continue to do it your way, if you wish and it is easier for you, but you will be wrong in a few cases and you should know that. Or you can change and call it by the real rule. That's up to you.

[TheTedP]

Sorry, having trouble posting...just a test

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by ditttoo

Just want to be clear, here. "All three" (ball, left foot, right foot) do NOT have to be in front court to establish front court. "All three" ONLY applies when the ball is being dribbled. Otherwise, all that is required to establish front court is the pivot foot. According to the post, both feet were established in the front court - so I have a back court violation.

Other body parts were touching the backcourt in the OP.