BC violation on tipped pass by offense

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Had one last Friday where I judged a situation "more than a tip"; I was confident in my call, but seek your verification.
In an attempt to rebound a missed shot, rebounder A1, from in front of his own basket, clearly "more than tipped" the rebound when he, while still in the air, with one hand pushed the ball back in an attempt to get it to A2 positioned near the top of the key. The ball went over A2's head and into his backcourt, after which A2 went and picked the ball up in his backcourt.
I whistled a backcourt violation, deeming A1's push of the ball to be player control, thus team control.
Given the definition of player control ("...when he/she is holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds"), was I correct?

If A1, one of his teammates, or his Head Coach had requested a time-out while the hand was in contact with the ball would you have granted it?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If A1, one of his teammates, or his Head Coach had requested a time-out while the hand was in contact with the ball would you have granted it?

I understand and appreciate your question. The actual time during which I deemed there to have been player control was too brief to have granted a request for a timeout.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I understand and appreciate your question. The actual time during which I deemed there to have been player control was too brief to have granted a request for a timeout.

Then BY YOUR DETERMINATION player control was not established by A1. Therefore, there was no team control, so you made an incorrect decision in calling a backcourt violation.

See the point?

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Then BY YOUR DETERMINATION player control was not established by A1. Therefore, there was no team control, so you made an incorrect decision in calling a backcourt violation.

See the point?

There is no timing aspect to player control. By that I mean there is no length of time you have to have player control for there to be team control. For example, on the tip off if B2 gathers the ball in both hands and then immediately loses the ball out of bounds, what are you going to do with the arrow? Hopefully, you'll point it toward A's basket and give the ball to Team A for a throw-in. During the time the player had the ball you probably would not have been able to recognize and grant a timeout request. Does that still mean player control and thus team control did not exist? No! Team control was established even if it was for only a second.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I understand and appreciate your question. The actual time during which I deemed there to have been player control was too brief to have granted a request for a timeout.

The point is not whether it was feasible to actually have requested a TO during the short window of time; the question asked is wether there was such a window.

Consider this, if A's coach is requesting TO, repeatedly, during this process, would you have granted it. The point of Nevada's question is simple, unless there was a window, no matter how brief, during which a TO could be granted, then you never had player control. Without player control, there is no team control, and thus no BC violation.

A controlled tap does not give you player control. If he grabbed it and threw it, then you were right.

On this play, I'd err on the side of no control.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The point is not whether it was feasible to actually have requested a TO during the short window of time; the question asked is wether there was such a window.

Consider this, if A's coach is requesting TO, repeatedly, during this process, would you have granted it. The point of Nevada's question is simple, unless there was a window, no matter how brief, during which a TO could be granted, then you never had player control. Without player control, there is no team control, and thus no BC violation.

A controlled tap does not give you player control. If he grabbed it and threw it, then you were right.

On this play, I'd err on the side of no control.

We have to get away from using this argument that if you would not grant a timeout then they didn't have team control. This works in some situations, but not all and is a bad way of thinking about this, IMHO. The time it takes to turn and recognize that it is the coach requesting a timeout is in many cases too long. A team could of had team control but lost it by the time you recognize the coach calling the timeout. Because I could not grant the timeout, does that mean the team did not have team control, if even briefly? No. All you need to know is did the player have control of the ball. If so, team control is established. There is no time requirement in the rule book for team control.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by rwest

We have to get away from using this argument that if you would not grant a timeout then they didn't have team control. This works in some situations,

IT works, in theory, in all situations. Intial player control and team control and ability to grant a time out all happen at the same time.

I agree that in practice, it would be difficult to request and be granted a TO in this brief instance, but it has happened.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

IT works, in theory, in all situations. Intial player control and team control and ability to grant a time out all happen at the same time.

I agree that in practice, it would be difficult to request and be granted a TO in this brief instance, but it has happened.

So by the definition that if you can call a time out there is team control, then there is no team control when team B requests a timeout but team A has a live ball inbounds. Team B can't call a timeout. I know no one is suggesting this. My only point is I don't like using when a timeout can be taken to define team control. Plus it's not needed. If you deem the player had control of the ball, then there is team control, no matter how much time transpired.

As to the OP, if I see a controlled pass by a player in the air, I'm going to interpret this as control. In order for a player to make a pass like this the ball had to come to rest in his hand, thereby, meeting the definition of control. He doesn't have to have two hands on the ball for control to be established.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rwest

If I see a controlled pass by a player in the air, I'm going to interpret this as control. In order for a player to make a pass like this the ball had to come to rest in his hand, thereby, meeting the definition of control. He doesn't have to have two hands on the ball for control to be established.

What? So if a long pass from A1 to A2 is in the air, halfway between A1 and A2, and someone from Team A requests a timeout, you, as an official will grant the request? So it wouldn't matter to you if a split second after the officials whistle to grant the timeout, B1 stole the pass was about to drive in for an uncontested layup. It sure would matter to the Team B coach.

Wow. If there ever was a job for the Mythbusters, this is certainly the job:

The head coach may request and be granted a timeout if his or her player is holding or dribbling the ball, or during a dead ball period.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rwest

If I see a controlled pass by a player in the air, I'm going to interpret this as control. In order for a player to make a pass like this the ball had to come to rest in his hand, thereby, meeting the definition of control. He doesn't have to have two hands on the ball for control to be established.

I'm still not sure what you're aiming at here. What you say is true, but I'm not sure why you're saying it, because what is being said can be misconstrued by those not well versed in basketball rules.

During an an "uncontrolled" pass, a fumble, a muff, a pass tipped by the defense, a ball dribbled off a foot, an interrupted dribble, etc., there is still team control until the ball is in flight during a try or tap for goal, an opponent secures control, or the ball becomes dead.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

We have to get away from using this argument that if you would not grant a timeout then they didn't have team control. This works in some situations, but not all and is a bad way of thinking about this, IMHO. The time it takes to turn and recognize that it is the coach requesting a timeout is in many cases too long. A team could of had team control but lost it by the time you recognize the coach calling the timeout. Because I could not grant the timeout, does that mean the team did not have team control, if even briefly? No. All you need to know is did the player have control of the ball. If so, team control is established. There is no time requirement in the rule book for team control.

Nor is there a time requirement for a time out to be granted. If Coach A is requesting it as A1 briefly gets control, I'm going to grant the time out, even if B1 steals it before my whistle blows. It's just like granting a TO after a made basket when the thrower has the ball by the time you blow the whistle. I'll have no problem explaining that to a coach.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by snaqwells

nor is there a time requirement for a time out to be granted. If coach a is requesting it as a1 briefly gets control, i'm going to grant the time out, even if b1 steals it before my whistle blows. It's just like granting a to after a made basket when the thrower has the ball by the time you blow the whistle. I'll have no problem explaining that to a coach.

+1