Violation....the current status of the ball is irrelevant....only the order of events (touches) relative to when the ball gained BC status (even if only momentarily).

Ok, I think I am slowly understanding, but how do you think is the best way to explain the rational for this play. I have many officials that do not think this is a violation. How should I explain to them that it is?

Send them here.

I like it Snaqwells.

The offensive team can't "use" the backcourt unless the defensive team is involved by touching the ball.

I sometimes like think of the backcourt as if it were like a delayed OOB call that depends on who touches it next. If team A causes the ball be have BC status after having team control in the frontcourt, the ball is effectively dead to them unless/until the other team touches the ball. The other team has to break the chain of events to free team A from a violation. (I'm using cause here in a sense similar to causing the ball to be OOB....being the last to touch the ball before it goes OOB, but not like touching the ball while OOB).

From An Esteemed Forum Member ...
 

The four elements for having a backcourt violation are: there must be team control; the ball must have achieved frontcourt status; the team in team control must be the last to touch the ball in frontcourt; that same team must be the first to touch after the ball has been in the backcourt.

Not quite...

the team in control must be the last to thouch the ball before it goes to tte backcourt.

This is NOT the same as being the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt.

Thanks ...
 

The four elements for having a backcourt violation are: there must be team control; the ball must have achieved frontcourt status; the team in team control must be the last to touch the ball in frontcourt before it goes to the backcourt; that same team must be the first to touch after the ball has been in the backcourt.

Better ???

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that Team A must be the last to touch the ball while the ball had a frontcourt status? Cause as you have it above, one might think that Team A must touch the ball while it they were in the frontcourt. We know this isn't true since a backcourt violation would occur if a Team A player threw the ball from the backcourt and it hit an official in the frontcourt and it rebounded back to the thrower.

Maybe I'm just nitpicking too much though. :confused:

No, because A need not touch the ball while it has FC status. Think of the pass from BC that hits an official in the FC and rebounds to BC. A never touched the ball while it had FC status, but it's still a violation.

Part of the rule states "last to touch the ball in the FC," but the other article clearly makes bob's play here a violation.

Bottom line, always listen to bob.

Like I said, I think I was just overthinking the wording. You're right...as usual. ;)

You've got something on your nose... :p

Not really. The red text is a bit ambiguous in that implies that team A touches the ball in the front court. Really, it is could be

last to have touched the ball while the ball was in the frontcourt

That clarifies that it is not where they touched the ball that matters.

Would the addition is Red be more accurate?