The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Backcourt or not (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/54489-backcourt-not.html)

Rufus Tue Sep 01, 2009 02:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 623296)
Yes, except his point 3 is wrong. ;)

Hopefully I can still salvage this, then, but let's go into this a little further. It's a backcourt violoation when:

9.9.1 - A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt

This seems to jive with the list provided by Mark, including point 3. Just trying to clear this one up is all.

Adam Tue Sep 01, 2009 02:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 623297)
9-9-1: A player shall not be the first to touch a ball...............if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt........

Play:
A1 dribbling in the BC near the division line. <strike>He passes across the court to A2, also in the backcourt. The pass bounces in the FC before A2 catches it, standing in the BC.</strike> He picks up his dribble and starts to throw a pass and instead fumbles it one foot in front of his feet, and the ball bounces in the FC. He reaches and picks it up, still in the BC.

Adam Tue Sep 01, 2009 02:45pm

Hint, look in 9-9-2.

Rufus Tue Sep 01, 2009 03:04pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 623300)
Hint, look in 9-9-2.

Ok, I think I get it how #3 doesn't work in all situations.

The thing I don't understand with 9-9-2, however, is that the ball is considered in the frontcourt only if neither the ball nor the player is touching the backcourt (4-4-2). Why, in 9-9-2 and in Snaqs' example, would the ball suddenly obtain frontcourt status is the player is still located in the backcourt?

Adam Tue Sep 01, 2009 03:26pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus (Post 623303)
Ok, I think I get it how #3 doesn't work in all situations.

The thing I don't understand with 9-9-2, however, is that the ball is considered in the frontcourt only if neither the ball nor the player is touching the backcourt (4-4-2). Why, in 9-9-2 and in Snaqs' example, would the ball suddenly obtain frontcourt status is the player is still located in the backcourt?

Because the player is not holding nor dribbling the ball.

just another ref Tue Sep 01, 2009 03:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 623133)
In order to have a back court violation, four conditions must be present. If any one of these conditions is missing, there is no violation - no exceptions.

1) There must be team control
2) The ball must have achieved front court status
3) The team in team control must be the last to touch the ball in front court
4) That same team must be first to touch the ball after it has been in the back court

This requires only slight editing to cover the last situation:

3. The team in team control must have been the last to touch the ball while it had frontcourt status.

Adam Tue Sep 01, 2009 04:21pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 623318)
This requires only slight editing to cover the last situation:

3. The team in team control must have been the last to touch the ball <strike>while it had frontcourt status.</strike> before it went to the backcourt.

Not that yours is wrong, but that's how I'd word it.

Rufus Tue Sep 01, 2009 04:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 623312)
Because the player is not holding nor dribbling the ball.

Ok, but then can you make the case that it's an interupted dribble? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to make sense of the rule.

Adam Tue Sep 01, 2009 04:49pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus (Post 623325)
Ok, but then can you make the case that it's an interupted dribble? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to make sense of the rule.

Not in my play, as the dribble ended when he picked it up to throw the pass.

That said, you bring up an interesting play.

1. A1 dribbling along the division line with his feet in the BC and the ball bouncing in the FC.

2. He attempts to fake a defender to the left, but the defender has none of it and they both go to the offensive player's right.

3. The ball, however, gets away from the dribbler and drifts to the left. It's now an interrupted dribble and bounces in the FC.

4. The dribbler is quick enough to recover and regain his dribble. However, his back foot is still touching in the BC when he touches the ball.

There is no player control during an interrupted dribble, so the 3 point rule is no longer in play and this would be a violation.

Rufus Tue Sep 01, 2009 06:10pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 623329)
Not in my play, as the dribble ended when he picked it up to throw the pass.

That said, you bring up an interesting play.

1. A1 dribbling along the division line with his feet in the BC and the ball bouncing in the FC.

2. He attempts to fake a defender to the left, but the defender has none of it and they both go to the offensive player's right.

3. The ball, however, gets away from the dribbler and drifts to the left. It's now an interrupted dribble and bounces in the FC.

4. The dribbler is quick enough to recover and regain his dribble. However, his back foot is still touching in the BC when he touches the ball.

There is no player control during an interrupted dribble, so the 3 point rule is no longer in play and this would be a violation.

Ok, that makes sense. I was re-reading the Rule by Topic and was reminded that the 3 point rule is only in effect with a dribble. 9-2-2 makes more sense with that in mind.

bob jenkins Tue Sep 01, 2009 08:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 623322)
Not that yours is wrong, but that's how I'd word it.

That's right.

There's a case play where A1 in teh BC passes th ball to the FC. The ball hits an offical and bounces back to the BC, where A1 is the first to touch.

The ball was never touched (by a player) in the FC, yet it's a BC violation.

BktBallRef Tue Sep 01, 2009 10:36pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus (Post 623325)
Ok, but then can you make the case that it's an interupted dribble? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to make sense of the rule.

A pass is not an interrupted dribble.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:47am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1