APG Video Request

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Welpe

So you're arguing in favor of the dreaded NFHS interpretation? I can't see a touch being both simultaneously the last in the frontcourt and the first in the backcourt.

I am not arguing anything actually, remember you asked me why this mattered. If a ball touches a player that is touching the backcourt, the ball is in the backcourt by rule. And if a team is in continuous team control when they touch the ball in that circumstance, then they have violated. The Ohio State player caused the ball to be in the back court by beginning a dribble and touching the backcourt, if you deem that team control was never lost by them. First to touch and last to touch is not the only way you can have a backcourt violation.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not arguing anything actually, remember you asked me why this mattered. If a ball touches a player that is touching the backcourt, the ball is in the backcourt by rule. And if a team is in continuous team control when they touch the ball in that circumstance, then they have violated. The Ohio State player caused the ball to be in the back court by beginning a dribble and touching the backcourt, if you deem that team control was never lost by them.

But causing the ball to be in the backcourt isn't a violation.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

First to touch and last to touch is not the only way you can have a backcourt violation.

Peace

Actually, it is.

If the OSU player was in the BC when they touched the ball that was previously touched by a Duke player, it is not a violation.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And if a team is in continuous team control when they touch the ball in that circumstance, then they have violated. The Ohio State player caused the ball to be in the back court by beginning a dribble and touching the backcourt, if you deem that team control was never lost by them.

Please cite the NFHS rule reference for this.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Please cite the NFHS rule reference for this.

Site a rule where I am wrong?

I also looked at the video again and it looks like the player touched the ball in the FC and then stepped into the BC. It is really close and as I said before I can see why it was not called if that was the case.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Site a rule where I am wrong?

9-9-1, "if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt." Or is there another rule you know of that makes it a violation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Site a rule where I am wrong?

Cite a rule that says it is a violation....if there isn't one, its legal.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I also looked at the video again and it looks like the player touched the ball in the FC and then stepped into the BC. It is really close and as I said before I can see why it was not called if that was the case.

Peace

Nothing like changing your description of the play to make your ruling correct.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Cite a rule that says it is a violation....if there isn't one, its legal.


Nothing like changing your description of the play to make your ruling correct.

So if he touches the ball while in the FC and then is dribbling and touches the BC, you are saying that is not a violation?

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So if he touches the ball while in the FC and then is dribbling and touches the BC, you are saying that is not a violation?

Peace

No, the situation was that the player was in the backcourt while the ball bounced up from the frontcourt and the player (still in the backcourt) then touched the ball (which had frontcourt status until it was touched) and started a dribble....no violation. That player was not the last to touch the ball BEFORE it went to the backcourt (by being touched by the player who was in the backcourt).

IF that player had touched the ball to start the dribble while he had frontcourt status, then stepped into the backcourt, it would be a violation, but that is not the situation being discussed or the one you described earlier....

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If a ball touches a player that is touching the backcourt, the ball is in the backcourt by rule. And if a team is in continuous team control when they touch the ball in that circumstance, then they have violated. The Ohio State player caused the ball to be in the back court by beginning a dribble and touching the backcourt, if you deem that team control was never lost by them. First to touch and last to touch is not the only way you can have a backcourt violation.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, the situation was that the player was in the backcourt while the ball bounced up from the frontcourt and the player then touched the ball to start a dribble....no violation. That player was no the last to touch the ball BEFORE it went to the backcourt (by being touched by the player who was in the backcourt).

It looks to me that he touched the ball before his feet were in the backcourt. I will look at it again but if he is dribbling and touches the backcourt that is not a last to touch, first to touch situation. That is a player taking a ball to the back court.

Peace

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I will look at it again but if he is dribbling and touches the backcourt that is not a last to touch, first to touch situation. That is a player taking a ball to the back court.

So again, if it is not first to touch/last to touch what rule prohibits this?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It looks to me that he touched the ball before his feet were in the backcourt. I will look at it again but if he is dribbling and touches the backcourt that is not a last to touch, first to touch situation. That is a player taking a ball to the back court.

Peace

If that is what happened, then you'd be right, but that is not what you or others stated earlier.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If that is what happened, then you'd be right, but that is not what you or others stated earlier.

Actually I said that if the ball was brought into the BC by the OSU player it would be a violation and that is not first to touch, last to touch situation. But it is hard to tell because there was no close up to when the player touched the ball and that is what I was thinking when I first saw the play. I cannot speak for what others said, I can only speak for myself and what I witnessed.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Actually I said that if the ball was brought into the BC by the OSU player it would be a violation and that is not first to touch, last to touch situation...
Peace

That is precisely a last to touch, first to touch situation. If that was what happened, the player was touching the ball before it went to the backcourt (last to touch), was still touching the ball at the moment it went to the backcourt, and continued touching it in the backcourt (first to touch).

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I cannot speak for what others said, I can only speak for myself and what I witnessed.

Peace

Which is why I quoted you. Here is what you said....

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If a ball touches a player that is touching the backcourt, the ball is in the backcourt by rule. And if a team is in continuous team control when they touch the ball in that circumstance, then they have violated. The Ohio State player caused the ball to be in the back court by beginning a dribble and touching the backcourt, if you deem that team control was never lost by them. First to touch and last to touch is not the only way you can have a backcourt violation.

Peace

The statement in red is incorrect.

[JRutledge]

Cameron,

I am still trying to figure out what I said was wrong. If you are touching the backcourt the ball is in the backcourt as a ball handler right. If the player took the ball to the backcourt, that is a violation if they were in possession of the ball or touching the ball in the FC first, which would have been the only way this was a violation in this play.

This is the NCAA Rule:
Section 12. Ball in Back Court

Art. 1. A player shall not be the first to touch the ball in his or her back court (with any part of his or her body, voluntarily or involuntarily) when the ball came from the front court while the player’s team was in team control and the player or a teammate caused the ball to go into the back court.

The question for me was always if TC ended with the OSU team and the Duke player took it over. Or if Duke player simply tipped the ball away then the OSU player was already in the BC, then that would not be a violation if they contacted the ball. And if it was so close to not tell, that is why I feel it probably was not called. But it looked to me like the OSU player might have taken the ball to the BC. I guess I do not see that as what we typically call a first to touch, last to touch situation as the issue is not who was first and last, the ball had FC status, then BC status by the player in control of the ball. Just like a player that is being trapped near the division line and steps into the BC or on the division line.

Peace

[Eastshire]

The problem with the angle we have is that we can't see for sure when the first touch takes place. It seems to me that the OSU player had to have touched it while still in the front court, or the ball's momentum would have taken it further into the back court.

However, from what we can see, the OSU player is in the back court when he touches a ball last played/touched by an opponent, which is not a violation even if OSU has team control.