Backcourt

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

1) did A have team control in A's frontcourt?
2) Was A the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt?
3) Was A the first to touch the ball in the backcourt?

If the answer to all three is "yes", then you have a backcourt violation on this play. If the answer to any of these three is "no", then you have no backcourt violation.

All three of your points are close, but not quite accurate.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

All three of your points are close, but not quite accurate.

What did I miss?

BadNewsRef, I may have miss-read the OP, read it in terms of "was backcourt call correct?", not "did we do the right thing after the call was overturned?".

Reading it that way, then you and Jurrassic Referee are correct.

[Adam]

#1 is technically right, although it could lead one to believe the team must have a player with control in the FC. We usually break it down into two parts.

1. Team control established.
2. Ball gains FC status.

Your #s 3 and 4 have the same error, in that the ball does not have to be touched "in" the respective courts to qualify.

A team need never touch the ball in the FC to have a violation. Same with the BC.

We tend to word them:

3. The last to touch the ball before it goes into the BC.
4. The first to touch the ball after it went into the BC.

This wording includes some violations that your wording would leave out.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

#1 is technically right, although it could lead one to believe the team must have a player with control in the FC. We usually break it down into two parts.

1. Team control established.
2. Ball gains FC status.

Your #s 3 and 4 have the same error, in that the ball does not have to be touched "in" the respective courts to qualify.

A team need never touch the ball in the FC to have a violation. Same with the BC.

We tend to word them:

3. The last to touch the ball before it goes into the BC.
4. The first to touch the ball after it went into the BC.

This wording includes some violations that your wording would leave out.

You're so gentle with the tyros.

[jTheUmp]

Good points, thanks for the clarification.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

A team need never touch the ball in the FC to have a violation. Same with the BC.

I'm trying to imagine a scenario where we could have a violation without Team A touching the ball in the frontcourt at some point, but my mind is coming up empty. Can you give me an example?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

I'm trying to imagine a scenario where we could have a violation without Team A touching the ball in the frontcourt at some point, but my mind is coming up empty. Can you give me an example?

Sure.
A1 holding the ball in his BC, near the division line. He throws a bounce pass to A2, also standing in the BC near the division line. The ball bounces once in the FC and once in the BC before A2 catches it.

Or, he throws a pass to A2 running down the sideline. Instead, the pass hits the ref, standing in the FC, and bounces back into the BC where A3 picks it up.

[Kelvin green]

My thoughts

I would talk with my partner, heshe may have seen the tip that knocked the ball loose but beyond that I seriously doubt he/she was watching the play that closely...Even if defense tipped it all I have to know on this play was whether or not A was last to touch/first to touch....

I do wonder if my partner can see a tip like that (presuming from lead)... well they arent watching what they ought to be watching... but assuming there was a tip in there this is not the NBA and as has been mentioned, the tip by defense is not the deciding factor of the violation.

Personally I'd like to see the loose ball definition from the NBA it would make things easier to call on BC but that's for another post

[NoFussRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

#1 is technically right, although it could lead one to believe the team must have a player with control in the FC. We usually break it down into two parts.

1. Team control established.
2. Ball gains FC status.

Your #s 3 and 4 have the same error, in that the ball does not have to be touched "in" the respective courts to qualify.

A team need never touch the ball in the FC to have a violation. Same with the BC.

We tend to word them:

3. The last to touch the ball before it goes into the BC.
4. The first to touch the ball after it went into the BC.

This wording includes some violations that your wording would leave out.

When are you blowing this dead.

Team establishes FC status, they are the last to touch the ball before it bounces in BC. Defender chasing after this ball, do you blow it dead when the ball reaches BC, or do you allow defender to pick it up and drive?

[APG]

Originally Posted by NoFussRef

When are you blowing this dead.

Team establishes FC status, they are the last to touch the ball before it bounces in BC. Defender chasing after this ball, do you blow it dead when the ball reaches BC, or do you allow defender to pick it up and drive?

Point four for backcourt violations:

First to touch the ball after it achieved a backcourt status

Now when does it become a violation?

[NoFussRef]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Point four for backcourt violations:

First to touch the ball after it achieved a backcourt status

Now when does it become a violation?

I don't recall ever blowing it dead until after an offensive player has chased it into BC and touched the ball in BC. I believe I have been correct in allowing the play to continue until this occurs, as the defense could chase it- pick it up and drive.

Thought this was pretty clear, but after reading this thread, some of the wording made it appear that as soon as the ball bounced in BC it was already a BC-violation. Had to ask.

[APG]

Originally Posted by NoFussRef

I don't recall ever blowing it dead until after an offensive player has chased it into BC and touched the ball in BC. I believe I have been correct in allowing the play to continue until this occurs, as the defense could chase it- pick it up and drive.

Thought this was pretty clear, but after reading this thread, some of the wording made it appear that as soon as the ball bounced in BC it was already a BC-violation. Had to ask.

The violation occurs when the team in control touches it first after the ball gained backcourt status. It's not a violation to cause the ball to obtain a backcourt status (contrary to a ridiculous interpretation by the NFHS).

[Adam]

Originally Posted by NoFussRef

I don't recall ever blowing it dead until after an offensive player has chased it into BC and touched the ball in BC. I believe I have been correct in allowing the play to continue until this occurs, as the defense could chase it- pick it up and drive.

Thought this was pretty clear, but after reading this thread, some of the wording made it appear that as soon as the ball bounced in BC it was already a BC-violation. Had to ask.

The offensive team must be the first to touch the ball after it went into the BC in order for a violation to occur.

Let me ask you a follow up question:

Where do you administer the throw-in on a BC violation?