Backcourt Violation EARLY in the Game?
 

A1 and B1 are the jumpers for the opening tip. A1 taps the ball forward toward A2 who is standing with both feet just in his front court. The tap is deflected by B2 toward the division line. A2 jumps into the air from the front court, catches the ball in the air and lands in the back court.

Using Rule 9-9-3 (exceptions include a defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in a player may legally jump from his/her front court, secure control of the ball with one or both feet in the back court), combined with Case 9.9.1 D (A1's pass near the division line is deflected by B1; A2 jumps from Team A's front court, catches the ball in the air and lands in the back court. RULING: Backcourt violation on team A), the tip play should also be called a back court violation on Team A, correct?

That's how I'd rule (but I'd also like to change the interp).

I fail to recognize where team control was demonstrated on the tip/deflection play.
No violation.

Bob, I couldn't agree more. This call, is related, but different from, my other post concerning the purpose of the division line and the hard-to-explain and harder-to-justify backcourt violation rules. In this case, the rule calls for a back court violation. I think that even those who feel that the purpose of all of these violations is to create more turnovers for the defensive team would have to concede that this one fails to meet that criteria (1 second into the game).

This situation is yet another that would be "fixed" (assuming that you agree that this is a bad rule) by a change in the division line rule.

TC when A2 caught the ball in the air.

Mick,
This play is no different than case 9.9.1 D. The player has front court status when he jumps into the air to catch the ball. When he catches the ball, he still has front court status (and team control). As soon as he lands in the back court, he has committed a violation, correct? If not, how is this situation different from 9.9.1 D?

As I read the play, team control is established when airborne A2 catches the ball. When he catches the ball he has front court status. When he lands, he has violated.

In 9.9.1D, team control is implied by the phrase * A1's pass *.

In this OP case, team control is established with A2' catch.

I don't know if this is the reason Bob wants to change the interp, but here's mine: for a throw-in, we have an exception that allows a player to be in FC, jump, catch the ball, and land in BC.

Why not extend that to any play where a player in the air establishes team control? That would make the OP legal, as well as an intercepted pass (anyone ever call that violation?).

Along with Bob and you, I 3rd that motion. The I's have it.

The play described by CMHCoachNRef is a backcourt violation by Team A. Why is it a violation?

RULING: When did the jump ball end? It ended when B2 touched the ball that was tapped by jumper A1. The jump ball exception to the rule ended when the jump ball ended. When A2 caught the ball, he simultaneously established player and team control of the ball as well as giving the ball front court status because A2's airborne status was in Team A's frontcourt. When A2 landed in Team A's backcourt he was the first to touch the ball in the backcourt after Team A had caused the ball to go to its backcourt after it had been in Team A's frontcourt.

MTD, Sr.

And why is A2 not a defensive player before he catches the ball and is allowed to land?

I would say that for A2 to be considered to be a defensive player, Team B would have to establish team control -- which has not happened, in this case.

:confused: :confused:

Personally, I would make an exception for the action due to and immediately following the center jump. Every year there's at least one play that I swear is a backcourt violation right after the jump, but I'm the tosser and there's no way I have the distance or perspective to be 100% sure.

It's part of my pregame to discuss the period immediately after the jump:

(1) Look for a backcourt violation
(2) Be ready for a designed outlet/fast break off the tip. Nothing worse than a player getting hammered and the crew not ready or out of position for it. Get the foul if it happens.

The team control issue,or lack there of, raises it's ugly head again.

Is that better (Team A changed to Team B)??? Oops....

Mick:

Whether A2 is a defensive player or not is not germane to the play. The jump ball ended when B2 touched the ball, therefore the exception to the rule is not longer in effect. See the rule references in the P.S.

MTD, Sr.


P.S.:

NFHS R4-S28-A3: "The jump ball begins when the ball leaves the referee’s hand(s) and ends when the touched ball contacts a nonjumper, the floor, a basket or backboard."

NFHS R9-S9-A3: "A player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in) may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt."

Mick:

Team Control is not implied in the Casebook Play 9.9.1, Situation D; the key to the ruling is that the Throw-in ended when the ball was touched by B1 thereby ending the throw-in and ending the exception to the Backcourt Violation Rule.

MTD, Sr.

Actually, 9.9.1D describes a throw-in -- therefore, there is no team control.

If the OP were modified to indicate that A1 tapped the ball and B2 recovered in his front court (establishing team control) and passed the ball in the direction of A2; while standing with both feet in Team A's front court (Team B's back court), A2 jumped in the air, caught the ball and landed in Team A's backcourt, this would not be a violation. Per 9.9.3 a defensive player is given the opportunity for the same exception as the player on the throw-in or jump ball situation.

The only reason I say that team control COULD be relevant would be in the situation involving the defensive player exception. Unless the OPPONENT has team control, a player cannot be considered a defensive player eligible for the Rule 9.3.3 exception regarding a back court violation.

Would the defensive provision apply to a steal at division line while he is in the air from his front court to back court? Does that make sence?

Yes -- that's exactly when it applies.

The problem with the wording in this rule is that, even though the jump ball has ended, the phrase "the team not in control" still applies to both teams.A player cannot jump, secure control, then land in the backcourt. But, that same player may deliberately tap the ball into the backcourt, after which he or a teammate may secure control standing anywhere.

Just Another Ref:

There is no problem with the wording. Read the entire first sentece of NFHS R9-S9-A3: "A player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in) may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt."

1) The ball is being put into play by a jump ball, not a throw-in.

2) There is no team control during a jump ball.

3) The jump ball ended when B2 tapped the ball. B2's tapping of the ball did not establish player and team control of the ball for Team B. B2's tapping of the ball only ended the jump ball.

4) At this point there still are no defensive or offensive players on the court because there is no team control by either team.

5) When A2 caught the ball he simultaneously established player and team control of the ball, and cause the ball to have frontcourt status for Team A.

6) When A2 landed in Team A's backcourt, he did two things simultaneously: (1) His actions caused Team A to make the ball to go from Team A's from court to its backcourt; and (2) He was the first to touch the ball after Team A caused the ball to go from its frontcourt to backcourt.

7) Team A has committed a backcourt violation.

MTD, Sr.

The first sentence is the problem. Lumping defensive players and all players during the throw-in and jump ball into one little parenthetical phrase I think creates a distortion. No matter who touches the ball, the defensive player is free to land anywhere, but any slight contact with a player, which may not even affect the flight of the ball, ends the throw-in or jump ball, and, well, we know the rest.

I liked the rule better before it was changed, when the exceptions were listed separately, but both allowed a player who gains control for his team to land without penalty.

Just Another Ref:

Did you read how I broke the play down? I broke down the play into individual acts in the order that they occured. It is not a difficult rule to apply.

MTD, Sr.