Backcourt violation or not...

[PSidbury]

Okay... understanding from NFHS Rule 9-9-1 that "A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt..." does the "has been in team control" still apply after a try for goal?

Situation: Team A player shoots on his basket in frontcourt but the ball rebounds into the backcourt after: 1) touching no other player; or, 2) touching (fumbling in an attempt to secure ball) team A player(s), but no control is established.

Team A secures the ball in the backcourt.

Is this a violation? Team A "had been" in control until the shot attempt.

I guess my real question is what is the definition of "has been" in this situation? What is the statute of limitations concerning "having been" in control?

Thoughout a game each team can claim they "had been" in control of the ball at some point... They "had been" in control of the ball during last week's game too.

Gotta love semantics.

Thanks!

[CoachP]

I think you're over semanting....team control ends on a try.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

Okay... understanding from NFHS Rule 9-9-1 that "A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt..." does the "has been in team control" still apply after a try for goal?

Situation: Team A player shoots on his basket in frontcourt but the ball rebounds into the backcourt after: 1) touching no other player; or, 2) touching (fumbling in an attempt to secure ball) team A player(s), but no control is established.

Team A secures the ball in the backcourt.

Is this a violation? Team A "had been" in control until the shot attempt.

I guess my real question is what is the definition of "has been" in this situation? What is the statute of limitations concerning "having been" in control?

Thoughout a game each team can claim they "had been" in control of the ball at some point... They "had been" in control of the ball during last week's game too.

Gotta love semantics.

Thanks!

Definitely over-semanticizing. Is that a word?

Obvious intent of the rule is "while in team control" - but perhaps this would be a good rewording...

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

They "had been" in control of the ball during last week's game too.

Gotta love semantics.

Thanks!

Yeah, you go ahead and blow the whistle, call back court, and then tell the coach it's a violation because his team had possession last week! Sheesh! Cut me a break!

[PSidbury]

So, in either situation 1) or 2) this is not a backcourt violation?
All semantics aside.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

So, in either situation 1) or 2) this is not a backcourt violation?
All semantics aside.

Correct.

[ILRef80]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

So, in either situation 1) or 2) this is not a backcourt violation?
All semantics aside.

No violation in either situation. Team control ended on the try (1st situation) and no one had established control in the second situation.

[BillyMac]

During a throwin, even under a team’s own basket, if the throwin is deflected, tipped, or batted by an offensive player in the frontcourt to an offensive player in the backcourt; or after a missed field goal attempt or a missed foul shot attempt, if the ball is deflected, tipped, or batted by an offensive player in the frontcourt to an offensive player in the backcourt; these are not a backcourt violations. In both cases team control, a player holding or dribbling the ball, has not yet been established.