Was watching a Girls Varsity Sectional Semi game the other day. A1 inbounding the ball under her basket on the baseline throws the ball to A2 who is standing 'on' the division line. A2 catches the ball. Backcourt Violation?

I thought it should have been. Refs at the game called nothing.

There's no team control on the throw-in, so it's ok to catch the ball in the backcourt or on the midcourt line (which is the same thing). Refs got it right.

Referees were, as usual, correct. No team control on a throw in so there can't be an over-and-back call.

Ok, so if she had one foot in the BC and one foot in the FC she would be ok also?

That is correct sir
 

There can be no back court violation until front court status is established by the team.

Yes, can inbound to a player with one or both feet in the backcourt. Once the team has established control in their frontcourt then there is a possibility for a backcourt violation... but not until that frontcourt has been established.

Yes

Once she obtains possession straddling the division line, if she raises the foot in the backcourt she then has frontcourt status. If she then replaces the foot in the back court...tweet- over-and-back.

I don't have the rulebook handy, but I was taught that you had to have *all three* (i.e., both feet and the ball) on the floor in front court before you established front court status. Am I in error?

No 3 points at this stage.
 

You cannot have a backcourt violation, without front court status being established. You have to have Team Control or Player Control before the ball can be set in the frontcourt by rule. And during a throw-in, neither can be present until someone grabs and takes control of the ball. Obviously there are no three points if the ball is thrown from the FC to the BC, because during a throw-in the ball is not by rule in the FC.

Peace

Re: No 3 points at this stage.
 

Jeff,

Thanks for your response. My question was in regard to firedoc's assertion: "Once she obtains possession straddling the division line, if she raises the foot in the backcourt she then has frontcourt status. If she then replaces the foot in the back court...tweet- over-and-back."

In this case it appears that both player and team control have been established in BC. The basis of my question was about whether or not the player had to have all three points in FC to establish FC status. Or, as firedoc asserted, if lifting the foot in BC while the remaining points were in FC was enough to establish FC status.

She can lift her backcourt foot up and down for 9.9999999999999999999999 seconds provided that when she puts it down it still is in the backcourt. All three, the ball and both feet, have to TOUCH the frount court to be considered in the frontcourt.

By the way, which is larger, the frontcourt or the backcourt? (I know the answer)

You have to have Team Control or Player Control before the ball can be set in the frontcourt by rule. And during a throw-in, neither can be present until someone grabs and takes control of the ball. [/B][/QUOTE]Why do they have to "grab" the ball on the throw-in to establish team or player control?:confused: Do you have a rules citation that will back that statement up? Can't they establish player control,and thus team control,by just tapping the ball to the floor with one hand and then dribbling,or even just dribbling immediately when they first touch the ball-without grabbing the ball at any time?

Backcourt is larger by the width of the half-court line.

Ah no, “all 3” only applies if she is dribbling.

That's right, brain fart......

Sorry Gentlemen, Some of you are wrong!
 

The three points is only of concern for a dribbler.

FireDoc is correct. If the back court foot is raised the player now has the ball in his hands and his location is in the front court. If he now places his foot down again into the back court THIS IS A VIOLATION.

See Rules 4-4-4, 4-35-1, 2, & 3, See case play 4.4.1 (specifically)

See BktBllRef's posting from about 3 weeks ago
http://www.officialforum.com/showthr...?threadid=7343

Re: Sorry Gentlemen, Some of you are wrong!
 

... on a dribble from backcourt to frontcourt. A dribbler with front court status doesn't know from the three-point rule.

Is this a test question?
 

Why do they have to "grab" the ball on the throw-in to establish team or player control?:confused: Do you have a rules citation that will back that statement up? Can't they establish player control,and thus team control,by just tapping the ball to the floor with one hand and then dribbling,or even just dribbling immediately when they first touch the ball-without grabbing the ball at any time? [/B][/QUOTE]


OK JR, you do not have to grab the ball at all. :rolleyes: I am so sorry that folks like yourself cannot understand that you need to establish some kind of ball control (not the wording in the rulebook I might add) in order to even have a backcourt violation. Usually a player "grabs the ball" to gain possession. If we use your logic, then we would have double dribbles all day long. Give a player the benefit of the doubt (use common sense) and make sure they do something other than taping at the ball in order to rule possession or player control or team control. So if you want to rule that a single bounce to the floor as an established a dribble, so be it. Unless they tap the ball to the floor several times, I am not constituting that a dribble for one tap to the floor. And it is very common to see a player tap the ball to the floor once and then grab the ball. If that is a dribble (even know technically they might have control of the ball) I am going to use good judgement and common sense and say it was not.

Peace

Jeff, you missed JR's point. You used the word "grab", which JR took to mean "hold". His point was that you can have player control by dribbling the ball without ever holding it. (Player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds.) That's all he was trying to get at.

Chuck

Re: If it was,you would fail!
 

I am so sorry that folks like yourself cannot understand that you need to establish some kind of ball control (not the wording in the rulebook I might add) in order to even have a backcourt violation. Usually a player "grabs the ball" to gain possession. If we use your logic, then we would have double dribbles all day long.[/B][/QUOTE]I understand fully and completely how player,and thus team control is established.I certainly understand that a player does NOT have to grab the ball on a throw-in to establish player control,as you claimed above.Player control is holding OR dribbling a live ball inbounds,as per NFHS Rule 4-12-1.If you have a rules citation that states that a player has to grab,grasp or hold a throw-in first to establish team control,please enlighten me,as I am not aware of one.

Unfortunately, folks like me really do understand this rule.Unless you can cite a rule that says anything different than what I posted above,may I suggest that folks like you are the ones that don't really understand this rule.

Btw,I am arguing this from a rules standpoint only.There's nothing personal involved.I've made my point,and backed it up with a rules citation.Unless you can give me some type of rules citation to back your claim,it would just be a waste of time for me to argue this further by repeating the same rules citation over and over.

Yes I used a word that is not exactly out of the rulebook, sue me. For God sake, I sure hope you guys are not holding every single explaination or answer questions to coaches with word for word explainations right out of the rulebook. And if he takes issue with "grab" as compared to "hold," all I have to say is WOW!!! :rolleyes:

Peace

You guys are obsessed with citations.
 

If that is the case, then the question would have never been asked in the first place. If all they have to do is look up what the rulebook says, why do we even cite the information? There would be no need for this board if all we had to do was cite information that is in the book. And if the average person understood everything in the rulebook word for word, then they would not come here to ask questions. To hold something you have to grab it first. They are practically the same thing in my eyes. If you want to nit pick that, the nit pick it.


Good for you. Do you want some money now? I do not need nor do I feel it is necessary to use a rule citation to back up anything. Grabbing to me is one of the ways they have to gain possession. You cannot hold something unless you make some effort to grab at it first. If a player does not make an effort to grab the ball, you cannot have possession (unless you rule they have started a legal dribble of course). Just because it is not the word for word definition does not mean that people did not and could not understand the point. The "grab" point was to illustrate that touching the ball was not going to constitute status in the FC alone. Bascially the ball can be touched several times and not once has possession taken place to establish the ball in the front court. So the ball can carom (sorry not rulebook language again) off a player from the front court to the back court of a team and not have a back court violation in this original example. This was the basic point.

Now get back to dissect the point I just made. You will try to find something, I am sure you will.

Peace

Again, just for clarity, JR wasn't taking issue with the "grab" as opposed to "hold". He was taking issue with the fact that it seemed like you were saying that it was necessary to hold the ball to have team control; when you and I both know that you could dribble the ball without ever holding it, and still have player (and thus, team) control.

The issue was not grab vs. hold. It was "holding" vs. "holding or dribbling".

[/B][/QUOTE]
If a player does not make an effort to grab the ball, you cannot have possession (unless you rule they have started a legal dribble of course). [/B][/QUOTE]Ah,you finally do understand the rule now.If you had added that phrase "unless you rule that they have started a legal dribble of course" in your original statement,it would have been correct instead of wrong.That was my point,and I'm glad that you finally can see that.

If a player does not make an effort to grab the ball, you cannot have possession (unless you rule they have started a legal dribble of course). [/B][/QUOTE]Ah,you finally do understand the rule now.If you had added that phrase "unless you rule that they have started a legal dribble of course" in your original statement,it would have been correct instead of wrong.That was my point,and I'm glad that you finally can see that.



[/B][/QUOTE]

Uhmmm...well...no....any idiot can say "If a player does not make an effort to grab the ball, you cannot have possession" but of course he would be wrong. There is no requirement for a player to grab or make an effort go grab the ball to obtain possession. All you need to do is hold it or dribble it in bounds while the ball is live.

Uhmmm...well...no....any idiot can say "If a player does not make an effort to grab the ball, you cannot have possession" but of course he would be wrong. There is no requirement for a player to grab or make an effort go grab the ball to obtain possession. All you need to do is hold it or dribble it in bounds while the ball is live. [/B][/QUOTE]I believe that the requirement that you stated above is the exact point that I was trying to make from the beginning.Grabbing or holding the ball is not a necessary act for a player to attain player control on a throw-in.

It should be the backcourt. The entire line division line is the backcourt. Oh, I better quote the rule in it's entirety. But I will just show you 4-13. For JR he will have to look it up under Article 2.

Peace

I believe that the requirement that you stated above is the exact point that I was trying to make from the beginning.Grabbing or holding the ball is not a necessary act for a player to attain player control on a throw-in. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm saying grabbing is not holding (at least to those if us who understand the English language) and means nothing in terms of the rules.

I'm saying grabbing is not holding (at least to those if us who understand the English language) and means nothing in terms of the rules. [/B][/QUOTE]I can certainly agree with that point.

For JR he will have to look it up under Article 2.
[/B][/QUOTE]Could you please explain what you mean by that response? :confused: I'm not sure of it's relevancy to this rules discussion.I've checked back and I haven't quoted anything out of Rule 2 in this thread at any time. As for the backcourt question,Back In The Saddle answered that one correctly about four and a half hours ago,so I thought it would be pointless and a waste of time to respond to that.

I've checked back and I haven't quoted anything out of Rule 2 in this thread at any time. [/B][/QUOTE]
Jeff was referring to Article 2 of rule 4-13