I don't think I've ever had one like this before

[Mark Padgett]

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]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

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]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

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.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

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]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

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.

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).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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.

backcourt

[jeschmit]

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!

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

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!