The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   I don't think I've ever had one like this before (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/50874-i-dont-think-ive-ever-had-one-like-before.html)

Mark Padgett Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:21pm

I don't think I've ever had one like this before
 
Yesterday afternoon game, A1 in frontcourt by about a foot and is being guarded. He sends a bounce pass to A2 who is almost parallel to him also in the front court, however the pass (with spin on it) bounces in the backcourt then up into A2's hands. It took me a split second to realize this is a violation even though both players were in the frontcourt, since A2 touched it after the ball had been in the backcourt.

And yeah, I had to explain it to the coach.

BillyMac Sun Jan 11, 2009 01:03pm

Wait Until Nevadaref Wakes Up ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 567334)
A1 in frontcourt by about a foot and is being guarded. He sends a bounce pass to A2 who is almost parallel to him also in the front court, however the pass bounces in the backcourt then up into A2's hands. It took me a split second to realize this is a violation even though both players were in the frontcourt, since A2 touched it after the ball had been in the backcourt.

Good call. I could have sworn that there was a caseplay on this exact situation, but I can't find it. I'm sure that Nevaderef will be along soon and dig up an annual interpretation from fifteen years ago that exactly matches your play.

CMHCoachNRef Sun Jan 11, 2009 01:10pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 567359)
Good call. I could have sworn that there was a caseplay on this exact situation, but I can't find it. I'm sure that Nevaderef will be along soon and dig up an annual interpretation from fifteen years ago that exactly matches your play.

BillyMac,
I am not sure that we have that precise case, but I think that we do have the exact opposite case where both PLAYERS are in in the backcourt but the ball lands in the front court and returns to the player in the back court.

Yet another case of a back court violation that was not intended (in my opinion) when the division line was put in.

Adam Sun Jan 11, 2009 01:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef (Post 567360)
BillyMac,
I am not sure that we have that precise case, but I think that we do have the exact opposite case where both PLAYERS are in in the backcourt but the ball lands in the front court and returns to the player in the back court.

Yet another case of a back court violation that was not intended (in my opinion) when the division line was put in.

I agree this may not have been originally intended, but I'm not sure it goes against their intent. In either case, the current rules makers clearly intend for this to be a violation.

I do think Mark's OP is a case where the intent of the original rule writers is met. Once you're in the FC, you are not allowed to use the BC voluntarily. That's what Padgett's players did.

BillyMac Sun Jan 11, 2009 01:35pm

Yellow Lantern Passed The Ball To Batzarro ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef (Post 567360)
I think that we do have the exact opposite case where both PLAYERS are in in the backcourt but the ball lands in the front court and returns to the player in the back court.

Is the play in the Bizarro World casebook?

Bizarro World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

bob jenkins Sun Jan 11, 2009 08:12pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef (Post 567360)
BillyMac,
I am not sure that we have that precise case, but I think that we do have the exact opposite case where both PLAYERS are in in the backcourt but the ball lands in the front court and returns to the player in the back court.

Correct. And some esteemed interpreter has opined (iirc) that the play in this thread is NOT a violation. Most of us disagree with the interpreter, and nothing has been published on it.

Quote:

Yet another case of a back court violation that was not intended (in my opinion) when the division line was put in.
I think it was intended -- once the offense gets the ball in the FC, they need to keep the ball in the FC. It's not much different than an OOB call (it' slightly different bevcause the BC is part of the playing court, so we need to give the defense an opportunity to get to the ball -- which we don't do on an OOB call).

JugglingReferee Mon Jan 12, 2009 09:08am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 567334)
Yesterday afternoon game, A1 in frontcourt by about a foot and is being guarded. He sends a bounce pass to A2 who is almost parallel to him also in the front court, however the pass (with spin on it) bounces in the backcourt then up into A2's hands. It took me a split second to realize this is a violation even though both players were in the frontcourt, since A2 touched it after the ball had been in the backcourt.

And yeah, I had to explain it to the coach.

I actually used this situation to illustrate the O&B rule with a fellow official this past weekend! Too funny!

Juulie Downs Mon Jan 12, 2009 05:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 567365)
I do think Mark's OP is a case where the intent of the original rule writers is met. Once you're in the FC, you are not allowed to use the BC voluntarily. That's what Padgett's players did.

Padgett's players are young enough that they do very little voluntarily or intentionally!

Nevadaref Mon Jan 12, 2009 05:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 567489)
Correct. And some esteemed interpreter has opined (iirc) that the play in this thread is NOT a violation. Most of us disagree with the interpreter, and nothing has been published on it.

http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...tml#post367584

jeschmit Mon Jan 12, 2009 06:15pm

I got a quick question as to where the ball gets put inbounds after a BC violation is called. Is it always at mid-court, or will the ball be administered to the nearest spot OOB when the violation was called? For example, if there is a BC violation but the offensive player doesn't touch the ball until it is almost directly underneath the defensive team's basket: does the ball get administered OOB under the basket, or does it still go to the division line?

I know I should know this, but I just wanted clarification...

Btw, I just found this site this morning, and I haven't stopped reading all day long! This place is great!

Nevadaref Mon Jan 12, 2009 07:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeschmit (Post 567802)
I got a quick question as to where the ball gets put inbounds after a BC violation is called. Is it always at mid-court, or will the ball be administered to the nearest spot OOB when the violation was called? For example, if there is a BC violation but the offensive player doesn't touch the ball until it is almost directly underneath the defensive team's basket: does the ball get administered OOB under the basket, or does it still go to the division line?

I know I should know this, but I just wanted clarification...

Btw, I just found this site this morning, and I haven't stopped reading all day long! This place is great!

NFHS and NCAA = nearest OOB spot to the violation.

NBA = division line

The difference is why people who watch too much NBA TV think that the NFHS and NCAA officials aren't doing it right.

bob jenkins Tue Jan 13, 2009 09:04am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeschmit (Post 567802)
does the ball get administered OOB under the basket, or does it still go to the division line?

I know I should know this, but I just wanted clarification...

What's the violation? It's not for causing the ball to go BC, it's for being the first to touch. So, the inbounds spot is the spot where the ball was touched.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:26pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1