NEW NFHS backcourt violation rule

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Why would "people" say that?

Possibly because the definition of dribble includes batting the ball????

If the bat is controlled and is to the floor, it is, by definition, a dribble. And the ball, even though it bounced in the frontcourt off of the official, is not technically in the frontcourt since it is now "during a dribble".

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Possibly because the definition of dribble includes batting the ball????

If the bat is controlled and is to the floor, it is, by definition, a dribble. And the ball, even though it bounced in the frontcourt off of the official, is not technically in the frontcourt since it is now "during a dribble".

It could be a pass as a pass may also be made by batting the ball.

Also, you are certainly aware that the 3-points rule doesn't apply to an interrupted dribble. So if the official were to deem that to be the case, then the ball would attain FC status.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It could be a pass as a pass may also be made by batting the ball.

It could also be a fumble. Batting alone doesn't determine the status of the ball.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It could be a pass as a pass may also be made by batting the ball.

Also, you are certainly aware that the 3-points rule doesn't apply to an interrupted dribble. So if the official were to deem that to be the case, then the ball would attain FC status.

Nothing I can disagree with in that.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

It could also be a fumble. Batting alone doesn't determine the status of the ball.

Actually, for it to be a fumble, the player must have held the ball in his grasp at some point as the definition of a fumble is when the ball slips from the grasp of a player.

So if the player merely bats a ball, then it could not be a fumble.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Actually, for it to be a fumble, the player must have held the ball in his grasp at some point as the definition of a fumble is when the ball slips from the grasp of a player.

So if the player merely bats a ball, then it could not be a fumble.

A bat might not be a fumble, but it could be. Please don't correct me when I'm right.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mbyron

A bat might not be a fumble, but it could be. Please don't correct me when I'm right.

I disagree. The bat can't be a fumble. It might follow a fumble. But, it can't be a fumble.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

A bat might not be a fumble, but it could be. Please don't correct me when I'm right.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I disagree. The bat can't be a fumble. It might follow a fumble. But, it can't be a fumble.

I'm going to have to agree with Camron, and not just to correct you.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS has changed the definition of a backcourt violation in the 2011-12 rules book. Unfortunately, this change has NOT been announced as either a rule change or an editorial change!

Previous wording (2010-11 season):
Art. 1... A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

...
I have put the changes to the text from the previous season in red.

Well, this should eliminate the often criticized Interp concerning A1 throwing a pass from the BC, B1 tipping it while in the FC, and A1 catching the deflection on the fly in the BC.