The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 09:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In the absolute sticks
Posts: 13
Backcourt violation - 3 second violation

I have been a lurker on the board for a couple of years now and find the dicussions interesting. I coached youth leagues for years and done some reffing for youth leagues also. I sometimes discuss rules with THE WORLD'S LEADING AUTHORITY (just ask him, he is a frequent poster on this forum) and admit I have learned a lot since doing so.

TWLA (see above) informed me that if a player catches a pass from the backcourt while straddling the half court line, then makes a pivot using his foot in the front court as the pivot foot, but sets his other foot down in the back court where it was when the pass was received, this is a violation, as once the foot in the backcourt is lifted it is deemed to be in the front court. I tend to believe he is correct, since he is TWLA, but this seems to me to be a bad rule, since this would be a legal play otherwise.

On a subsequent discussion TWLA advised that an offensive player in the front court with one foot in the lane and one foot out of the lane would still be called for a 3 second violation even if he lifts the foot in the lane, but does not put it back down outside the lane.

This seems to be in conflict with the backcourt principle in the example above. Can anyone explain the rationale to me on this? Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 09:30pm
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,301
Is it I?

I know I discuss lots of rules with lots of people. By chance, am I the "TWLA" to which you're referring?
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 09:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
I know I discuss lots of rules with lots of people. By chance, am I the "TWLA" to which you're referring?
I seriously doubt it. The OP wrote "frequent poster."

You only have 69 posts right now.

PS TWLA is correct about both situations.

Last edited by Nevadaref; Wed Dec 10, 2008 at 10:15pm.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 10:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 149
Shades of Gray,

Regarding backcourt issues, I think it makes it easier to understand (in most cases) if you think of the backcourt as "out of bounds" once the frontcourt has been established. Let me explain...
For example, if the player has one foot IB and the other raised above OOB, he is ok until he puts the foot down OOB.
If a player steps on an end line, he is OOB, if he steps on the mid-court line (once in the front court) then he is in the backcourt.

One that is confusing for coaches/parents is when the def. player (B1) bats a ball from the dribbling off. player (A1) and hits the off. players leg and goes into the backcourt, and team A player is the first to touch the ball, it is a back court violation. If B had hit the ball off A and it went out of bounds, you would expect it to be B's ball.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 10:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In the absolute sticks
Posts: 13
Freddy,

No, you are a couple of thousand posts short and a couple of thousand miles away from me and TWLA.

Thanks for the replies but I am still having trouble trying to understand why this should be a backcourt violation in the example I described. As I stated earlier, I don't doubt TWLA, Nevada Ref, etc.'s statements that under the rules this is a violation, but I can't see why it should be. For example, if the player did not lift his non-pivot foot but merely dragged it, this would not be a violation, correct? So why should it be a violation for merely picking the foot up and setting it back down? Also if the player is dribbling the ball while staddling the line, the foot in the back court can be picked up and put down, right?

Maybe I should just go with "That's the rule, live with it", but I would like to hear some logical explanation of why the rule is written the way it is. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 10:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 149
You can check out some prior posts on this subject. It's a popular one.

When dribbling the ball from the backcourt (BC), the player needs to get both feet AND the ball into the frontcourt (FC) before FC status can be established. So, as long as one of those three are in the BC, then the player is in the BC (10 sec. count continues, too).

I.E. He can dribble the ball in the FC and back to the BC if he keeps at least one foot back there.
It is a good technique to draw a trap early when you come across half court near the sideline. The def. coach will want two of his players to "box in" the dribbler with the sideline and midcourt line (MC) to trap him. Dribbler "shows" the ball over MC while keeping one foot in BC...trap comes, he pulls ball back and goes around them...
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 10:27pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,771
He Persuaded The Good Doctor To Have Only Thirteen Rules ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades of Gray View Post
Maybe I should just go with "That's the rule, live with it", but I would like to hear some logical explanation of why the rule is written the way it is.
Unfortunately that's the way the NFHS works sometimes. Even our most esteemed, knowledgeable, and reliable Forum members can't agree on all interpretations, and this is not a rare occurrence. If you want a logical explanation of a rule, ask Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. It may take him a while to go up into his attic, but not only will he find you the explanation, he'll tell you why he, and Dr. Naismith, wrote the rule the way they did. Really.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

I was in prison and you came to visit me. (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 10:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades of Gray View Post
Freddy,

No, you are a couple of thousand posts short and a couple of thousand miles away from me and TWLA.

Thanks for the replies but I am still having trouble trying to understand why this should be a backcourt violation in the example I described. As I stated earlier, I don't doubt TWLA, Nevada Ref, etc.'s statements that under the rules this is a violation, but I can't see why it should be. For example, if the player did not lift his non-pivot foot but merely dragged it, this would not be a violation, correct? So why should it be a violation for merely picking the foot up and setting it back down? Also if the player is dribbling the ball while staddling the line, the foot in the back court can be picked up and put down, right?

Maybe I should just go with "That's the rule, live with it", but I would like to hear some logical explanation of why the rule is written the way it is. Thanks.
The official NFHS rulings contain the explanations.

9.7.2 SITUATION:
A1 is standing with one foot inside and the other outside the
three-second restricted area. A1 lifts the foot from the restricted area and returns
it there without touching it first to the nonrestricted area.
RULING: Violation. This
action does not terminate the three-second count. The count goes on since
merely lifting the foot from the restricted space is interpreted as an attempt to
evade the rule and avoid its purpose. However, there is no three-second count
during rebounding action or during a throw-in. The count on a player in the
restricted area is suspended when that player begins a try for goal.


4.4.1 SITUATION:
As Team A is advancing the ball from its backcourt toward
its frontcourt, A1 passes the ball to A2. A2 catches the ball while both feet are on
the floor with one foot on either side of the division line. In this situation, either
foot may be the pivot foot. (a) A2 lifts the foot which is in the backcourt and then
puts it back on the floor in the backcourt; or (b) A2 lifts the foot which is in the
frontcourt, pivots and puts it on the floor in the backcourt.
RULING: In (a), it is a
backcourt violation. When A2, while holding the ball, lifts the foot which was in
the backcourt, the ball is now in the frontcourt. When A2s foot then touches in
the backcourt, it is a violation. In (b), when A2 lifts the foot which is in the frontcourt
and places it down in the backcourt, the location of the ball has not
changed. The ball is still in the backcourt and no violation has occurred. (4-35-2)



The second one depends heavily on the definitions of ball and player location.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 11, 2008, 12:46am
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
I have an explanation, in layman's terms, for the difference in the two violations.
The two violations are apples and oranges. For a player in control of the ball, the backcourt, after ten seconds, is a restricted area. Not only do you have a limited time in this area, once you leave this area, you may not return. The lane is not a restricted area, but rather a limited access area. One of the limits, along with the time, is that you must totally vacate the area before re-entry.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove

Last edited by just another ref; Thu Dec 11, 2008 at 03:13am.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 11, 2008, 01:58am
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades of Gray View Post
........once the foot in the backcourt is lifted it is deemed to be in the front court.
Not sure exactly what was said and what was inferred, but there is no question of where one foot is deemed to be. In the matter of player location, 4-35-1 tells us: "The location of a player......is determined by where the player is touching the floor....."

If a player without the ball or a player holding the ball has something touching the frontcourt and nothing touching the backcourt, that player is located in the frontcourt.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove

Last edited by just another ref; Thu Dec 11, 2008 at 03:14am.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 11, 2008, 09:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades of Gray View Post
Thanks for the replies but I am still having trouble trying to understand why this should be a backcourt violation in the example I described.
I'm sure that you agree / know that if a player is in the FC holding the ball and then touches the BC, that it's a violation. (Right?)

So, your play:

Player holds ball straddling division line -- Player and ball are in BC (when a player is touching both BC and FC, the player is in BC).

Player lifts BC foot -- player and ball are now in FC (the "three points" rule applies only to a dribbler -- not to a player holding the ball; if a player is only touching the FC, s/he's in the FC).

Player places foot on floor in BC -- player and ball are in BC.

So, it's a violation.

Note that if the player "drags" his / her BC foot (as you ask), that the second step above hasn't happened -- the player has remained in the BC.



So, it's a violation.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 11, 2008, 09:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NW OH
Posts: 117
about the "3-points rule"

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
I'm sure that you agree / know that if a player is in the FC holding the ball and then touches the BC, that it's a violation. (Right?)

So, your play:

Player holds ball straddling division line -- Player and ball are in BC (when a player is touching both BC and FC, the player is in BC).

Player lifts BC foot -- player and ball are now in FC (the "three points" rule applies only to a dribbler -- not to a player holding the ball; if a player is only touching the FC, s/he's in the FC).

Player places foot on floor in BC -- player and ball are in BC.

So, it's a violation.

Note that if the player "drags" his / her BC foot (as you ask), that the second step above hasn't happened -- the player has remained in the BC.



So, it's a violation.
I don't mean to hijack the thread but read Bob's response and was wondering...

If A1 is in the backcourt and makes a sudden turn to go along the division line so that they're in the front court with their feet but in the back court with their dribble what's the call? I assume that the BC count would continue since the ball hasn't touched the FC yet. Am I right?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 11, 2008, 09:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdoug View Post
I don't mean to hijack the thread but read Bob's response and was wondering...

If A1 is in the backcourt and makes a sudden turn to go along the division line so that they're in the front court with their feet but in the back court with their dribble what's the call? I assume that the BC count would continue since the ball hasn't touched the FC yet. Am I right?
THe player is dribbling, so the "three points rule" applies. Have all three points touched the FC? (that's rhetorical). So, what is the ball location?(ditto) If the ball is in the BC, do you continue your count? (ditto)
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 11, 2008, 09:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,673
Send a message via MSN to IREFU2 Send a message via Yahoo to IREFU2
As far as backcourt, remember all three point need to be in the front court, which means the ball and both feet!!!!!
__________________
Score the Basket!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 11, 2008, 11:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
THe player is dribbling, so the "three points rule" applies. Have all three points touched the FC? (that's rhetorical). So, what is the ball location?(ditto) If the ball is in the BC, do you continue your count? (ditto)
Oooh, I like the new socratic Bob!

Also, if Bob's asking questions, and questions aren't right or wrong, then is Bob always right?

Unless they're the right questions....
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
backcourt violation? yankeesfan Basketball 4 Wed Jan 17, 2007 08:31am
Backcourt Violation? williebfree Basketball 39 Thu Feb 10, 2005 05:21pm
Backcourt violation? mrt1963 Basketball 7 Mon Dec 08, 2003 04:53pm
Backcourt Violation? Cornellref Basketball 4 Wed Dec 03, 2003 08:26am
Backcourt violation??? jshock Basketball 10 Wed Nov 27, 2002 01:31pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:37pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1