You make the call - newbies especially invited to participate

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

Using the 3-point thingy as a guideline is confusing. That rule only applies on a dribble from the bc to the fc, and in no way is applicable to this sitch. The question is, does the ball have fc status or bc status when A2 catches it? Since A2 has bc status, so does the ball. End of discussion.

Julie,

I was responding to the post that was right before mine. See Amesman's previous post.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by deecee

Julie,

I was responding to the post that was right before mine. See Amesman's previous post.

Okay, I see. but you responded wrong. If he catches ball with his feet in the fc, and then dribbles in the bc, it's a violation, right? What am I missing?

[Mark Padgett]

Juulie - did you get my email yesterday? If not, that would be lame. (inside joke, guys)

[jeschmit]

I would say it isn't a BC violation as he still has the right to be in the BC since both of his feet still obtain some of the backcourt floor. I'm thinking of this in terms of what if he started dribbling and moved into the BC and thus removed his big feed from the division line. I would not call a violation then, so I would not call a violation if he passed the ball back without dribbling.

Is there a trick answer to this? Because it seems like there might be...

[referee99]

Originally Posted by jeschmit

I would say it isn't a BC violation as he still has the right to be in the BC since both of his feet still obtain some of the backcourt floor. I'm thinking of this in terms of what if he started dribbling and moved into the BC and thus removed his big feed from the division line. I would not call a violation then, so I would not call a violation if he passed the ball back without dribbling.

Is there a trick answer to this? Because it seems like there might be...

You're right. I would suggest he is IN the backcourt. Period.

[deecee]

Julie,

he added to the stitch that what if the same player then began to dribble but both his feet ended up in the FC and the ball remained in the BC.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Juulie - did you get my email yesterday? If not, that would be lame. (inside joke, guys)

Yea. I got it. Yup, lame!

[Scratch85]

The division line is in the backcourt. I know this doesn't really apply to the OP, but since b/c violations are commonly confusing, I thought it would be good to think this out before we get on the court.

[swkansasref33]

no. the rule states that the offensive player must establish himself in front court-all three points- ball, both feet, before he is in the front court. this is not a violation

[Adam]

Originally Posted by swkansasref33

no. the rule states that the offensive player must establish himself in front court-all three points- ball, both feet, before he is in the front court. this is not a violation

Which situation are you referring to?

[swkansasref33]

the op