Backcourt?
 

Team A has the ball in the frontcourt for a throw in. A1 throws it to A2, but A2 can't handle the pass, and the ball goes into the backcourt. A2 is the first to touch the ball in the backcourt.

Keeping the rule change in mind, what do ya got?

Team Control ???
 

Nothing. Supposedly, the new rule change won't effect plays like this, but I understand that the wording in the rules doesn't support this "Supposedly".

No violation

This is one of these cases where the "Intent and Purpose" of the rule applies. The wording does not appear to be very clear, but it is clear that the rule was changed to not shoot FTs on fouls when the ball is being thrown in. As Billy said I do not think this changed, but it is hard to tell sometimes with some of the wording.

Peace

NCAA already had the TC throw-in rule in place and it was not a violation due to throw-in exceptions.

The OP is not a violation because there was no player control in the frontcourt.

The wording of the new rule requires both team AND PLAYER control in the frontcourt. Since there was no player control established in the frontcourt, there cannot be a backcourt violation.

Thanks. That's the way I called it, but I wanted to double check with the new rule

Which "new rule" are we talking about?

I know the OP is not a BC violaton but I'm wondering as to what new rule you are referring.

The new "TC on a throw-in" rule -- it's led to some changes in wording in other areas (including cases)

That's what I searching for, where does it say that there has to be "both team AND PLAYER control in the frontcourt" in order for a backcourt violation to occur?

http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...tion-rule.html

Here's the thread on this from a couple months ago.

Nevada's post is misleading as the new TC rule and its associated case plays make no reference to " both team AND PLAYER control in the frontcourt". The newly worded rule he is referencing is 9-9-1.

I'm quite sure the "rule change" the OP wanted us to "keep in mind" was 4-12-2d.

Well, what I was going for was how the new team control on throw in rule affected backcourt violations.

The general consensus seems to be that what I had was no violation, because there was never player control in the frontcourt.

No doubt about that. Just that Nevada is a lawyer and likes to play word games.

I'm no english major either...I prefer words less than four syllables.

PC in the FC is not required for a violation. The committee made it clear that the change is only intended to affect whether FTs are shot on fouls.

The new team control rule itself does not specifically affect the backcourt violation, because the throw-in does not originate in frontcourt or backcourt. It originates out of bounds.

9-9-1: A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in player and team control in the frontcourt.....

That's a sloppy way of trying to make the BC rule stay the same in light of the TC rule change.

As Nevada pointed out, this change in wording affects plays that were violations under the old wording, and the committee made it clear their intent was not to change the BC rule.

Confused ???
 

Team A has team control in their backcourt. A1, dribbling, has player control in the backcourt. A1 throws a pass ahead to A2, who is in the frontcourt, and who is not expecting the pass. The passed ball hits A2 in the back of the head (thus, he is neither holding, nor, is he dribbling the ball, so no player control), the ball bounces off of A2's head, bounces into the backcourt, and the ball is picked up by A3, who is now holding the ball.

According to just another ref's definition above, this is not a backcourt violation.

Man, I'm confused, and I haven't even started my weekend "bender".

While that IS what the rule says, they NFHS has also stated that the only effect of the new rule is to be whether you shoot FTs or not when a foul occurs during a throwin. They have, once again, create a rule change that, as written, means something entirely different than what they say it is suppose to do.

Okay, I should have written "the new wording of the rule (9-9-1) requires both PLAYER and TEAM control" as there is no "new" rule, the NFHS simply changed existing ones.

The exact text of the NFHS in the front of the new case book is "The change primarily affects how foul penalties will be administered." Clearly "primarily" is not "exclusively" so the NFHS does allow for other implications of these changes. One of those is the impact upon backcourt violations.
Please see 4.12.2 Situation part (b) ruling for this sentence, "There is no backcourt violation in (b) since player and team control had not yet been established in Team A's frontcourt before the ball went into Team A's backcourt."

Let's hope for an internet interpretation to clarify this newly created mess which Mary left us before departing. :(

I'm Leaving, You Guys Take Care Of This ...
 

Maybe that's why she left?

I forgot to do this sooner, but this is just wrong.

What is wrong?

The fact that the throw originates from OOB, and thus neither FC nor BC, is not sufficient to say the rule change does not affect BC violations. Especially in light of the fact that the rule does in fact affect BC violations.