Backcourt Violation
 

After my high school season gets done with I always try to take some time and work some intramural games at the university. I still look young enough tobe in college so it's not a big deal to fit into the mix. I try to work with the officials and hopefully develop one of two of them for the following season to do games for our association. I have actually had a lot of success this year and think I'll bring in 3 or 4 for next winter. But enough of that...

I was working with an official on Tuesday and we were discussing backcourt violations. We talked about "last to touch...first to touch" principle. We then moved into the controversial backcourt violation caseplay (Forgive me for not remembering the case number as I do not have my books in front of me).

A1 is dribbling in his/her frontcourt. B2 touches the ball and deflects it towards A's backcourt. A1 recovers the ball with both feet in the backcourt (a) after the ball bounces in the backcourt or (b) before the ball bounces in the backcourt or (c) after B2 touches the ball in the backcourt. RULING: In
(b), it is a violation since the ball still had frontcourt status before being touched by A1. A1 caused the ball to go into backcourt status on their touch. In (a) and (c), legal.

We discussed team and player control and when each ends. Then he came up with a situation I'm not sure of :eek:

A1 is in his/her frontcourt being trapped at the division line by B2 and B3. B2 touches the ball and deflects it towards A's backcourt. A1 recovers the ball with both feet in the backcourt (a) after the ball bounces in the backcourt or (b) before the ball bounces in the backcourt. Here is the thing that stumped me. What if B2 has one foot in the backcourt (the other presumably in the frontcourt) when he deflected the ball? Does B2 having one foot in the backcourt give the ball backcourt status?

-Josh

yes 4-4-1 4-4-3

Shew...I thought that was the case but why not ask the all knowing forum ;) Thanks

-Josh

My .02
 

Does this depend on whether he was on the LOS at the snap or in the backfield? :)

It wasn't a case play and has never been published in one of the books. It was actually an interpretation published on the NFHS website, specifically situation 10 in the 2007-08.

And it was totally bogus! :(

Was? Past tense? Has anything ever been published which negated this interp?
If not, is it still considered to be the official position of the NFHS until we read otherwise?

Which one are you Nevada? Bill or Ted? Are you still havind an excellent adventure?:D

Yes. The rule book.

amen

But I think you know what I meant.

Does this mean the ones that write the interps are not required to read the rule book?