Another problem with the new backcourt rule?
 

Just going over Rule 9 and noticed 9-9-2 now says:

The underlined part was added this year to compensate (yet again) for the new team control rules. However, does this now contradict the age-old "three points in the frontcourt" rule for a dribbler?

If I'm dribbling from backcourt to frontcourt, and I dribble the ball so that it touches the frontcourt but I'm still in the backcourt, doesn't this new rule say that I've committed a backcourt violation? I have player control (I'm dribbling a live ball) in my backcourt, and I've caused the ball to go to the frontcourt and then back to the backcourt without being touched by another player.

Don't think the new rule changed 4-4-1:

A ball which is in contact with a player or with the court is in the backcourt if either the ball or the player (either player if the ball is touching more than one) is touching the backcourt.

More directly, and though you address it, the status of the ball doesn't change to frontcourt for purposes of the rule according to 4-4-6:

During a dribble from backcourt to frontcourt, the ball is in the frontcourt when the ball and both feet of the dribbler touch the court entirely in the frontcourt.

Since the ball is never established in the frontcourt according to the above I don't think it contradicts the new wording.

The 3-points rule means that in this situation the ball has not yet attained FC status.

No contradiction...you never caused the ball to go into the frontcourt by virtue of you being a dribbler which means the ball is in the frontcourt only when both feet and the ball are in the frontcourt.

Scrapper I think you are over thinking this. the three point rule still applies.

Notice, though, that it doesn't say that the ball must gain frontcourt status. It just says backcourt to frontcourt. While dribbling, the ball can clearly go into the frontcourt without having frontcourt status.

1) I'm clearly overthinking it. I don't even have a scrimmage until next week, so I have to do something. :D

2) The 3-points rule still applies, but (maybe) only because they've told us to ignore the actual wording of the rules when they cause a contradiction with how certain plays were called last year.

And how does the ball go from backcourt to frontcourt? The rule has always read that way except with the added part about player control...if you really read it the way you are, you'd be calling this a violation in the past.The only way it does so while a player is dribbling the ball is if all three points are in the frontcourt. Otherwhise, in your scenario, the ball is in the backcourt by rule.

What new backcourt rule ?? :confused:

What's so hard about the following...

The rule change adding team control during a throw in only affects the administration of fouls committed during the throw in. It has no affect on existing frontcourt-backcourt, three seconds, or traveling/dribbling violations.

The comments on the changes say that, but the rules that got changed actually say otherwise. The new team control rules (as actually written) create several new violations that didn't exist before. But the comments provided with them say that those things are not actually violations.

So, in a few years, we'll be having an argument about the rules where one person will accuse others of making up their own rules and will insist that they should be called as they're written while another person will be arguing on the side of intent and purpose of the rule.

Anything that depends on team control is affected....the 3 second count, 10 second count, over-and-back.

Let 'em "fix" them next year.

Meanwhile, let's not shoot foul shots when a foul is committed on a throw in and officiate everthing else like we always have, instead of having people call violations on that were never intended to be called as violations.

Spirit and Intent.... It's not that hard !!

I agree, but that will not stop someone, somewhere down the road saying that they should be enforced as written....we've been there so many times it is bound to happen again.

+1

Those are the guys that don't get it and never will.

They don't like to study what we really do, they just like to argue.

But still, it is far better to write and well written rule...one that is simple, concise, and accurate than to depend on tribal knowledge about what they really meant.

Fix The Rule ...
 

If an intelligent alien from Mars landed on Earth and wanted to become a basketball official, and he memorized the 2011-12 rule book backward, and forward, how would he know the purpose and intent of this team control rule, and the "intent" of this rule in regard to the backcourt rule?

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbn...81763625fb84eb