Back Court vs. Front Court.

[tref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The only other case is a ball in flight, which has the status of the last thing it touched.

So, that being said... A1 in the f/c passes to A3 also in the f/c, B3 deflects the ball TOWARD the b/c. Before the ball touches the floor in the b/c A3 recovers in the b/c.
Ruling?

No I didnt start this 1 again!

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by tref

So, that being said... A1 in the f/c passes to A3 also in the f/c, B3 deflects the ball TOWARD the b/c. Before the ball touches the floor in the b/c A3 recovers in the b/c.
Ruling?

Backcourt violation on A3 according to the Fed.

Use the same scenario with the ball going OOB. If A3 is standing OOB and touches the ball befoe it hits OOB, A3 has committed the violation.

[tref]

Oh I concur with ya!
I just remember the board being split 50/50 on the this matter a while back.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by tref

Oh I concur with ya!
I just remember the board being split 50/50 on the this matter a while back.

Can you link to that thread? I can't imagine it approached 98 vs 2, and that is even including the one-and-only Old School

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by justacoach

Can you link to that thread? I can't imagine it approached 98 vs 2, and that is even including the one-and-only Old School

2007-08 NFHS Supplemental Rules Interpreations: SITUATION 10.

By unilateral decree...

Situation 10 still bothers me.

Any thoughts on this play?

New interps Sitch # 10

How's that for a start?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

A1, in the team's frontcourt, passes to A2, also in the team's frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team A's backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team A's frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team A's backcourt, but never having touched in Team A's backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team A's backcourt.

For some reason, every time this situation happens in one of my games, I always seem to blink my eyes and miss the call. When the coach complains about the no call and mentions Situation 10, I explain that I had something in my eye and missed it.

[Nevadaref]

That silly interp directly contradicts the ruling in part (a) of this NFHS Case Book play. Note that NO VIOLATION occurs for the action in part (a). That's neither a backcourt violation or a 10-second count violation.


9.8 SITUATION D: Team A is in control in its backcourt for seven seconds. A1
throws the ball toward A2 in the frontcourt. B1 jumps from Team A’s: (a) frontcourt;
or (b) backcourt and while in the air bats the ball back to A1 in A’s backcourt.
Does this give Team A 10 more seconds to get the ball to the frontcourt?
RULING: Yes, in (a), a new count starts because B1 had frontcourt location when
touching the ball thus giving the ball frontcourt location. In (b), the original count
continues as Team A is still in control and the ball has not gone to frontcourt. (4-
4-2; 4-3; 4-35-1)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Use the same scenario with the ball going OOB. If A3 is standing OOB and touches the ball befoe it hits OOB, A3 has committed the violation.

It didn't always use to be that way on a throwin.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tref

So, that being said... A1 in the f/c passes to A3 also in the f/c, B3 deflects the ball TOWARD the b/c. Before the ball touches the floor in the b/c A3 recovers in the b/c.
Ruling?

No I didnt start this 1 again!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

So, that being said... A1 in the f/c passes to A3 also in the f/c, B3 deflects the ball TOWARD the b/c. Before the ball touches the floor in the b/c A3 recovers in the b/c.
Ruling?

No I didnt start this 1 again!

I thought this was the ruling we all thought was wrong.
B3 is the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt, so it can't be a violation.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I thought this was the ruling we all thought was wrong.
B3 is the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt, so it can't be a violation.

Hmmmm ~ When does the ball obtain b/c status? When it merely crosses the division line in the air OR when it touches the floor or a player in the b/c?

I'm in the Situation 10 interp camp

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tref

Hmmmm ~ When does the ball obtain b/c status? When it merely crosses the division line in the air OR when it touches the floor or a player in the b/c?

I'm in the Situation 10 interp camp

Apples/Oranges. Causing the ball to obtain BC status is not the violation. The Situation 10 interp directly contradicts both the rule as it written as as it has been called forever.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Apples/Oranges. Causing the ball to obtain BC status is not the violation. The Situation 10 interp directly contradicts both the rule as it written as as it has been called forever.

Right last to touch in f/c & first to touch in the b/c is the violation. So again, we know who deflected toward the b/c but when when did the ball really gain b/c status? And who caused that?

I understand your position, but it works for me & until the guys I work for say otherwise...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

Right last to touch in f/c & first to touch in the b/c is the violation. So again, we know who deflected toward the b/c but when when did the ball really gain b/c status? And who caused that?

I understand your position, but it works for me & until the guys I work for say otherwise...

What our "employers" say is really irrelevant to the discussion of whether it "should" be a violation.
The rule says team A must be the last to touch "before" the ball gains BC status and the first to touch the ball "after" it has gained BC status.
Events:
A: Team A is last to touch
B: Ball gains BC status
C: Team A is first to touch

How is it possible for a single act (A3 touching the ball) to occur both "before" and "after" any single event?

[Adam]

Sitch:
A1, in the BC, pass the ball towards A2 along the division line.
B3, standing completely in the FC reaches and tips the pass.
A2, standing in the BC, grabs the ball before it touches the floor in the BC.

The logic of the ruling leads to the conclusion that a violation should be called.
The logic of the rule, however, does not.