The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Airborne and backcourt (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/40679-airborne-backcourt.html)

dan74 Sat Dec 29, 2007 06:57pm

Airborne and backcourt
 
Sorry, I know this has been discussed, but I'm still not clear:

"A1 is inbounding the ball near the division line and throws the ball in to A2 who jumps and while off the floor secures control of the ball, and then lands in the backcourt." Violation?

I believe it's a violation and the exception of 9-9-3 doesn't apply, right?

Thanks ahead of time!

BktBallRef Sat Dec 29, 2007 07:04pm

Wrong.

Why do you think it doesn't apply?

dan74 Sat Dec 29, 2007 07:31pm

Although it appears I'm wrong, here's my thinking.

A2 is airborne and secures control, which I thought establishes player and team control, and, as a result, the throw-in ends. I thought at that point we'd then go to 4-35-3...airborne player has the same status as when that player was last in contact with the floor.

Ed Maeder Sat Dec 29, 2007 07:42pm

Read 9-9-3 again. It states during a throw-in. Your example is a throw-in, and the exception applies until the player makes a normal landing.

Adam Sat Dec 29, 2007 07:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan74
Although it appears I'm wrong, here's my thinking.

A2 is airborne and secures control, which I thought establishes player and team control, and, as a result, the throw-in ends. I thought at that point we'd then go to 4-35-3...airborne player has the same status as when that player was last in contact with the floor.

Then what situation would this exception apply to?

dan74 Sat Dec 29, 2007 07:53pm

Good point...9-9-3 must apply to something. After reading it a couple times it has finally sunk into my think head. Thanks.

BktBallRef Sun Dec 30, 2007 01:08am

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan74
Good point...9-9-3 must apply to something. After reading it a couple times it has finally sunk into my think head. Thanks.

Your think head? :)

Yes, the rule allows the player to do exactly what he did.

Adam Sun Dec 30, 2007 04:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BktBallRef
Your think head? :)

As opposed to his "other" head.

Cuse Kid Sat Jan 12, 2008 11:58pm

So what's the correct call here? Backcourt violation or not?

Adam Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:13am

the exception applies, and it's not a violation.

Gimlet25id Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:27am

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan74
Although it appears I'm wrong, here's my thinking.

A2 is airborne and secures control, which I thought establishes player and team control, and, as a result, the throw-in ends. I thought at that point we'd then go to 4-35-3...airborne player has the same status as when that player was last in contact with the floor.

I agree with everyone that this isn't a violation.:)

Let me put a little twist on the play...B1 tips the throw in pass and A2 jumps from F/C, catches the ball in the air, lands in the B/C. Anything?;)

Cuse Kid Sun Jan 13, 2008 09:45am

This would be a violation because the throw-in ended when it was legally touched by B.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:00pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1