The whole idea of picking up a count where we left off goes against the simple concepts of team control and a dead ball.

A backcourt count starts when there's team control in the backcourt. It doesn't start during a throw-in (no control), and control ends when the ball is dead.

Once that ball is dead, whatever happened prior to that point is irrelevant. We start fresh. We don't care whether a team crossed the division line before the dead ball. That ball is dead. And from there, we start over, so you can toss that throw-in anywhere you want in-bounds. If it's controlled in the backcourt, then there it is. Start counting.

Concepts can have exceptions. We already have a major one to that concept with the shot clock. The 10-second backcourt count isn't some sort of sacred cow. You don't even have one in games played under NCAA-W rules. It's not like asking to raise the basket to 11'.

Sure they have exceptions, but if we go to that, would we then not allow a front court throwin to be thrown into the BC? Again, I see this as the proverbial solution in search of a problem.

I don't think the 2 have to be intertwined. Apples and oranges IMO.

I think you could find ample enough folks who think it is a problem for a team to get 10 additional seconds to cross midcourt just because they called a time-out.

I don't know, BNR. If by "folks," you mean fans, then I think this doesn't make their radars. (I say the number one fans' desired change is a national shot clock.) If you mean coaches, maybe, but my best guess is most are indifferent to this. If you mean officials, then I doubt it, as it's just another thing we'd have to think about, and most of us would say we have enough as it is.

Getting back to the shot clock, a backcourt-count rule change would be far more easily enforced if there were a shot clock nationwide. If you get a shot clock first, then I think we could make this change more effectively.

In FIBA, the backcourt count is not reset on an OOB or held ball where the offence retains possession. FIBA also only allows 8 seconds to advance the ball over half.


I don't have a problem with keeping the back court count, but a 5 second or 3 second count being suspended by a time out is foolish to me.

Instead of worrying about back court counts, how about a shot clock instead? I really like the lack of a back court count and the shot clock in the college women's game.

Now what do you think the odds are that CMB will want to spend the money on a shot clock set up?

With their rich alumni? I'd say it would be easy to get the funds. :D The 4A girls coaches across the state were talking about using a shot clock experimentally, but it never came to be unfortunately.

I know one alumnus would who wouldn't contribute to such a purchase. :D

Cheapskate!!!

Is that 10 seconds in metric? BTW - did you know that France was the first country to adopt the metric system? Figures.

Guilty