NEW NFHS backcourt violation rule

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Here is the play which I believe has been altered.
A1 is dribbling in his backcourt. He throws a pass to A2 who is standing in Team A's frontcourt. The ball caroms off A2's knee and returns to the backcourt where A1 retrieves it.

According to article 1 from 2010-11 this would be a backcourt violation. However, since there was no player control in the frontcourt by A2, only team control by team A, according to the new wording for article 1 of 2011-12 there would not be a violation.

Note that this play is not covered by article 2 either as a player does touch the ball in the frontcourt. The problem is that the player in the frontcourt never gains control and the new wording clearly requires both player and team control in the frontcourt.[/COLOR][/B]

The case book still has this as a violation, even though the case ruling doesn't match the rule wording.

*9.9.1 SITUATION C: A1 is dribbling in his/her backcourt and throws a pass to
the frontcourt. While standing in A’s frontcourt: (a) A2 or (b) B3 touches the ball
and deflects it back to A’s backcourt. A2 recovers in the backcourt. RULING: In
(a), it is a violation. The ball was in control of A1 and Team A, and a player from
A was the last to touch the ball in frontcourt and a player of A was the first to
touch it after it returned to the back court. In (b), legal play. A Team A player was
not the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt. Team A is entitled to a new 10-second
count.

[Camron Rust]

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!

...

NEW 2011-12 text:
Art. 1... A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in player and 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.

...

Here is the play which I believe has been altered.
A1 is dribbling in his backcourt. He throws a pass to A2 who is standing in Team A's frontcourt. The ball caroms off A2's knee and returns to the backcourt where A1 retrieves it.

According to article 1 from 2010-11 this would be a backcourt violation. However, since there was no player control in the frontcourt by A2, only team control by team A, according to the new wording for article 1 of 2011-12 there would not be a violation.

...

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The case book still has this as a violation, even though the case ruling doesn't match the rule wording.

*9.9.1 SITUATION C: A1 is dribbling in his/her backcourt and throws a pass to
the frontcourt. While standing in A’s frontcourt: (a) A2 or (b) B3 touches the ball
and deflects it back to A’s backcourt. A2 recovers in the backcourt. RULING: In
(a), it is a violation. The ball was in control of A1 and Team A, and a player from
A was the last to touch the ball in frontcourt and a player of A was the first to
touch it after it returned to the back court. In (b), legal play. A Team A player was
not the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt. Team A is entitled to a new 10-second
count.

Given the case play, I'd conclude that they just messed up the grammar in the rule (again)....that they never intended to change the result of this play.

Here is what they probably meant...

A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in player and team control and has been 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.

(Blue words added by me)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The case book still has this as a violation, even though the case ruling doesn't match the rule wording.

*9.9.1 SITUATION C: A1 is dribbling in his/her backcourt and throws a pass to
the frontcourt. While standing in A’s frontcourt: (a) A2 or (b) B3 touches the ball
and deflects it back to A’s backcourt. A2 recovers in the backcourt. RULING: In
(a), it is a violation. The ball was in control of A1 and Team A, and a player from
A was the last to touch the ball in frontcourt and a player of A was the first to
touch it after it returned to the back court. In (b), legal play. A Team A player was
not the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt. Team A is entitled to a new 10-second
count.

I thought of that Case Book play and figured that it wouldn't change. I also believe that it was NOT the intent of the NFHS to alter the rulings for backcourt violations. I am merely pointing out that with the new wording of the rule that is what they unfortunately did. We must now await further clarification.