Yet another backcourt sitch

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by just another ref
if we just like to argue, (I know I do) let's go and practice our spin pass some more. If it bounces in the backcourt then spins forward and bounces again, this time in frontcourt, before A2 picks it up, is this a violation?

Either I'm not properly understanding some of these posts, or some of us still aren't getting it. The original situation is a violation. JAR's modified situation above is also a violation. And the two cases are both violations for the same reason. Team A was the last to touch the ball before the ball went into the backcourt and then was the first to touch the ball after it had been in the backcourt. I'm not sure how to make it any clearer than that. Both situations are violations.

The only reason the modified situation is up for debate is b/c the ball got back into the frontcourt before being touched by Team A. That is irrelevant. Team A touched it last before it went into the backcourt and then was also the first to touch it after it went into the backcourt. Therefore, violation.

Chuck

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

If we think of the whole backcourt being painted (colored) the same color as the division live it will make this easier.

Player in FC steps on colored area. BC violation.

A1 bounce passes to A2 ball hits colored area also BC violation

Just a thought

[Edited by MN 3 Sport Ref on Jan 8th, 2003 at 04:10 PM]

[Int]

I like thought MN 3.
Going back to my original post, the intent of the backcourt rule is to keep a team in their front court once they have established that position. Once you accept that, all the other rules that help define the backcourt violation become very logical.

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by RecRef
My take is that it is not a violation. If it were, than a A1 or A2 standing, or sitting, or lying on the floor “in his front court” could not pickup a loose ball rolling along and on the division line.

Please cite a rule that backs up your "take." I have cited rule that implies just the opposite.

And this particular case you are citing, assuming the ball has already been F/C, is a clearcut violation. A ball rolling on the line is in the B/C by definition, because the line is B/C. Therefore, there is no question that a ball that has been F/C and is now rolling on the division line is B/C and a F/C offensive player touching it commits a violation.

[just another ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Either I'm not properly understanding some of these posts, or some of us still aren't getting it. The original situation is a violation. JAR's modified situation above is also a violation. And the two cases are both violations for the same reason. Team A was the last to touch the ball before the ball went into the backcourt and then was the first to touch the ball after it had been in the backcourt. I'm not sure how to make it any clearer than that. Both situations are violations.

The only reason the modified situation is up for debate is b/c the ball got back into the frontcourt before being touched by Team A. That is irrelevant. Team A touched it last before it went into the backcourt and then was also the first to touch it after it went into the backcourt. Therefore, violation.

Chuck

What he said.

[Camron Rust]

As Chuck said, this is very clearly a backcourt violation.

Again, as he said, it's not where the ball was touched but who touched it last before it went frontcourt to backcourt and who touched it first after it went frontcourt to backcourt.


Summarizing from Hawk's and Bob's posts:

1. Team A control
2. Ball in Team A's F/C
3. Team A last to touch before ball goes to B/C
4. Team A first to touch after ball goes B/C

[Nevadaref]

Thank you, Camron, Chuck, and Hawks Coach. You have restored my confidence. The first part of this thread was downright scary.
The officials out there that do not know this is a violation should have their whistles revoked!

PS The exact play described in the original post happened in a JV game out here last year. The JV officials correctly called it a backcourt violation. However, the varsity officials doing the next game questioned them on it. Two of them thought it was not a violation and the other one said it was. I settled the debate/bet in the bar that night. Varsity guys had to pick up the tab.