Backcourt question

[bainsey]

Someone on our statewide forum posed this question:

"Team A has the ball in their frontcourt; A1's pass to A2 is deflected by B1, and as the ball is bouncing toward the division line, A2 & B3 simultaneously touch the ball, causing it to go into backcourt. A4 is then the first to retrieve the ball. Is this a violation?"

I'm conflicted on this. Thoughts?

[Nevadaref]

Good question. I would say no violation.

It is not possible to state that a member of Team A was the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It is not possible to state that a member of Team A was the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt.

On the contrary, I say. It is not possible to state that member of Team A did NOT touch the ball last in the frontcourt. Team control, last to touch, first to touch. On paper, this is a violation.

I'm trying not to get caught up in that "spirit of the rule" crud, but my initial instinct told me, no violation. I can't back that up in the book, though.

[Nevadaref]

1. A simultaneous actions by two opposing players are not treated the same as a singular action. A simultaneous touch by opponents is not the same as only one player touching the ball. So the consequences of the action are different. This is true for a simultaneous foul as well. Consider the impact on the concept of continuous motion or how the game is resumed.

2. Consider that the ball went OOB instead of into the backcourt. Which team would get the throw-in? Team B wouldn't automatically be awarded the ball following a simultaneous touch. They would have to have the AP arrow. However, if a member of Team A was the last to touch the ball, then Team B would be awarded the throw-in. So logically we can conclude that a member of Team A was not the last to touch the ball.

3. So the last to touch requirement must be singular with regard to a team. Therefore, we can state that this requirement was not met by the circumstances of the play, and thus there is no violation.

[Camron Rust]

Simultaneous actions don't imply that neither one touched the ball last but, instead, that both did. The handling of these cases (OOB example) is not because a team was not last to touch but because both are in violation of a rule and both are to be penalized. Both infractions are to be penalized but have conflicting penalties (possession). That fact forces us to the AP arrow.

Therefore, to have a backcourt violation doesn't require that team A be that sole team to last touch the ball. Only that the other team didn't touch it after them.

In practice, I'm probably not going to be able to tell that precisely and will only call it if they obviously touched it last and alone.

[Nevadaref]

Forget practice, Camron. This is a theoretical discussion.

Let's take it as a given that the ball is knocked into the backcourt while under the control of Team A by A2 and B3 simultaneously touching the ball, and then recovered by A4.

The debate is to treat this as both being the last to touch or absolving A2 of being the last to touch due to the participation of B3.

By pure physics I believe that treating it as A2 being the last to touch has great merit. There is no denying that he touched the ball and that no one touched it after him.

However, from the standpoint of the written rules, I don't believe that the words were drafted with this context in mind. Rather I think that the rule was written to cover only a singular final touch. The implication of the word "last" in our language is a singularity. As in being the last to do something or to finish last. If there is a tie, it is usually specified.

Furthermore, the absence of words to the effect of "or simultaneously with an opponent" lends credibility to deciding this is not a violation. I just don't believe that the rules writers intended to penalize a team in such a case. However, I do hate hanging my hat on "the purpose and intent of the rules" though.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bainsey

"Team A has the ball in their frontcourt; A1's pass to A2 is deflected by B1, and as the ball is bouncing toward the division line, A2 & B3 simultaneously touch the ball, causing it to go into backcourt. A4 is then the first to retrieve the ball. Is this a violation?"

NFHS Rule 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."

-From the OP:
- Did team A have team control in the frontcourt? - YES!
- Was a team A player last to touch the ball in the frontcourt before it went into the backcourt?- YES - A2!
- Was a team A player first to touch the ball in the backcourt? - YES- A4!

All of the criteria necessary for a backcourt violation have been met, by rule.

Rules Rulz!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

NFHS Rule 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."

-From the OP:
- Did team A have team control in the frontcourt? - YES!
- Was a team A player last to touch the ball in the frontcourt before it went into the backcourt?- YES - A2!
- Was a team A player first to touch the ball in the backcourt? - YES- A4!

All of the criteria necessary for a backcourt violation have been met, by rule.

Rules Rulz!

JR and Camron are correct. Camron, also makes a good practical point about seeing the play.

MTD, Sr.

[Mark Padgett]

Let me throw this into the mix. Say team A had control and they are in their frontcourt when A1 passes to A2. The ball deflects off A2 into their backcourt. A1 races after it and touches it in the backcourt at exactly the same time B1 touches it. It is a violation on team A? It's the same principle as the other situation in this thread. It comes down to this - does a simultaneous touching of the ball by a member of each team also count as an individual touching by each player? If yes, then we have a violation in both cases. If no, then no violation in either case.

I guess it is dependent on how you define "first to touch". Can two players each touch a ball "first"? If I touch the ball at exactly the same time as you, did I touch it "first"? To me, "first" means "before anyone else", not "at the same time as someone else". If we touch at the same time, then no one was "first". To be "first" at doing something, you have to do it before anyone else does it. To be "last" at something, everyone else has to have done it before you did. I don't have violations in either case.

Of course, I could be wrong. I was wrong once before - I think it was in 1970.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Let me throw this into the mix. Say team A had control and they are in their frontcourt when A1 passes to A2. The ball deflects off A2 into their backcourt. A1 races after it and touches it in the backcourt at exactly the same time B1 touches it. It is a violation on team A? It's the same principle as the other situation in this thread. It comes down to this - does a simultaneous touching of the ball by a member of each team also count as an individual touching by each player? If yes, then we have a violation in both cases. If no, then no violation in either case.

I guess it is dependent on how you define "first to touch". Can two players each touch a ball "first"? If I touch the ball at exactly the same time as you, did I touch it "first"? To me, "first" means "before anyone else", not "at the same time as someone else". If we touch at the same time, then no one was "first". To be "first" at doing something, you have to do it before anyone else does it. To be "last" at something, everyone else has to have done it before you did. I don't have violations in either case.

Of course, I could be wrong. I was wrong once before - I think it was in 1970.

Given the NFHS backcourt interpretation and since I am an interloping troublemaker: suppose team A has TC in the frontcourt and B deflects the ball into the backcourt. In a) before the ball bounces A1 and B1 simultaneously touch the ball. In b) A1 touches the ball simultaneous to the ball touching the floor. In C) A1 and B1 touch the ball simultaneous to the ball touching the floor. Whatcha got?
________
Vaporizer television

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

To me, "first" means "before anyone else", not "at the same time as someone else". If we touch at the same time, then no one was "first". To be "first" at doing something, you have to do it before anyone else does it.

So, in the Olympic 50m swimming final (or any other racing sport's final), if there's a tie for first place, then neither of athletes get a gold medal?

No. It's happened before, and BOTH get a gold medal. They were both first. (It goes gold-gold-bronze, for those keeping track of the medal count.)

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by bainsey

So, in the Olympic 50m swimming final (or any other racing sport's final), if there's a tie for first place, then neither of athletes get a gold medal?

No. It's happened before, and BOTH get a gold medal. They were both first. (It goes gold-gold-bronze, for those keeping track of the medal count.)

That's because it's written into their rules. Show me where it's written into NF basketball rules. If a game ends with both teams having the same number of points, do both teams win? Of course, I wouldn't know, since I've never worked a game in which both teams had the same number of points at the end of regulation time.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Show me where it's written into NF basketball rules.

What, the definition of "first" and "last"?

Those are simple English words, not basketball terms. We're expected to know their meaning coming into games.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by bainsey

What, the definition of "first" and "last"?

No. Reading my post, it should have been obvious that I implied there was no NF basketball rule that states if two teams have the same number of points at the end of regulation, then they both are awarded victory, as it is written into the rules of other sports.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Let me throw this into the mix. Say team A had control and they are in their frontcourt when A1 passes to A2. The ball deflects off A2 into their backcourt. A1 races after it and touches it in the backcourt at exactly the same time B1 touches it. It is a violation on team A? It's the same principle as the other situation in this thread. It comes down to this - does a simultaneous touching of the ball by a member of each team also count as an individual touching by each player? If yes, then we have a violation in both cases. If no, then no violation in either case.

I guess it is dependent on how you define "first to touch". Can two players each touch a ball "first"? If I touch the ball at exactly the same time as you, did I touch it "first"? To me, "first" means "before anyone else", not "at the same time as someone else". If we touch at the same time, then no one was "first". To be "first" at doing something, you have to do it before anyone else does it. To be "last" at something, everyone else has to have done it before you did. I don't have violations in either case.

Of course, I could be wrong. I was wrong once before - I think it was in 1970.

Or, to do something first could mean to do something with no one else before having done so before....which allows for ties for first.

I maintain that at least one person has to have been the last to touch it and be the first to touch it....but it oculd be more than one person in the case of simultaneous touching.