![]() |
|
|
|||
9-9-2?
Rule 9-9-2: "While in player and team control in its backcourt, a player shall not cause the ball to go from backcourt to frontcourt and return to backcourt, without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, such that he/she or a teammate is the first to touch it in the backcourt."
I've been trying to get my head around possible situations prohibited by this rule. The casebook has none to clarify. Other than "the backcourt player's pass hitting the leg of an official in the frontcourt then going back..." (previous thread's sitch), can you suggest any other possible situation?
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call Last edited by Freddy; Mon Oct 24, 2011 at 12:55pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
To start his dribble, he tosses the ball forward, with backspin on it, so that the ball hits the floor in the frontcourt, spins back to the backcourt, and he continues dribbling. That is of course, if you consider this move a fumble and not a pass to himself. |
|
|||
Quote:
You could have a pass from (near) one side of the court to (near) the other that bounces in the FC and is released by and caught by players in the BC. |
|
|||
It's impossible to pass the ball to oneself.
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is. |
|
|||
To be fair I would not know what you are talking about as many people say this as an explanation as a violation.
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Head Might Be Starting to Get Around It
Quote:
"Since 9-9-1 was revised in order to accomodate the new rule stipulating team control during a throw-in ("The change primarily affects how foul penalties will be administered"), the Casebook situation 9.9.1.C.a trumps the unfortunate phraseology of the new 9-9-1 when, say, backcourt A1's pass touches frontcourt A2 (no player control) and goes back to backcourt where A1 resumes control; this a backcourt violation." Is that a correct statement for that sort of backcourt-to-frontcourt-to-backcourt situation?
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call Last edited by Freddy; Mon Oct 24, 2011 at 03:28pm. Reason: Clarifying the Unclarifiable |
|
|||
This just keeps getting better . . .
Quote:
I don't know what to make of that. If they mean the ball was but no longer is in control of A1, then the ball could not have been in player and team control in the frontcourt. If they mean the ball was and still is in control of A1 during the pass, . . . I'm going to be really confused. The use of the word "While" in 9-9-2 makes that whole rule seem impossible. Right now, I am going with Freddy's assessment that case book trumps poorly written rule book. My association has been very slow to discuss this. I hope we get it figured out before season starts. |
|
|||
[QUOTE=Freddy;795648]Rule 9-9-2: "While in player and team control in its backcourt, a player shall not cause the ball to go from backcourt to frontcourt and return to backcourt, without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, such that he/she or a teammate is the first to touch it in the backcourt."
The first few times I read the rule it seemed to give me issues. The rule is worded strangely, but it breaks down fairly simply...I think. So if player A1 in the backcourt with player control, throws a pass to A2, in the front court. And A2 doesn't see the ball coming and it hits off his leg. Now we have team control in the front court. The ball bounces into the backcourt and A3 retrieves it, backcourt violation. We do not need player and team control in the frontcourt. The rule says we need player and team control in the backcourt. |
|
|||
Quote:
The only thing I can come up with is if a A1 stopped dribbling and held the ball the ball near the division line while still in his backcourt, then touched the ball to the floor or an official in the frontcourt while his feet remained in the backcourt. Even then I'm feeling confused. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is. |
|
|||
That's my plan. But I love trying to figure out what they (NFHS) were thinking when they created the new wording. It is hard for me to believe they just didn't know the situation they were creating.
|
|
|||
Quote:
![]() What I'm guessing will happen is we'll see an editorial change or two over the next couple of years, until the get the wording clear.
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|