From IAABO Dec. 2011 Newsletter:

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Did you miss the NFHS rule change for this year that says a team is in control of the ball when the ball is at its disposal for a throw-in?

APG - It's the same reason the NCAA-M (@ Michigan State?) play you posted video of earlier this season was discussed and ruled an IW instead of the backcourt violation that was originally whistled by the trail.

[APG]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

APG - It's the same reason the NCAA-M (@ Michigan State?) play you posted video of earlier this season was discussed and ruled an IW instead of the backcourt violation that was originally whistled by the trail.

No, that play wasn't a backcourt violation because the NCAA rule specifically allows a player to cause the ball to go into the backcourt if player control hasn't first been established even though the throw-in ended. That play has nothing to do with your play (which is an NFHS case book play).

The reason this is a team control foul is because team A is considered in control when the ball is at their disposal for the throw-in...while the throw-in ended, team control continues until there's a try/tap, the ball becomes dead, or the other team secures possession of the ball. The throw-in ending has nothing to do with how you adjudicate this play.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Is this play wrong, then? And why am I on the strugglebus about this tonight?

Play # 5: "A1 has the ball for an endline throw-in in his/her frontcourt. A1's pass to A2, who is standing near the division line, is high and deflects off A2's hand and goes into the backcourt. A2 is then the first to control the ball in A's backcourt. RULING: Legal. There is no violation since player and team control had not been established in team A's frontcourt before the ball went into Team A's backcourt."

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Is this play wrong, then? And why am I on the strugglebus about this tonight?

Play # 5: "A1 has the ball for an endline throw-in in his/her frontcourt. A1's pass to A2, who is standing near the division line, is high and deflects off A2's hand and goes into the backcourt. A2 is then the first to control the ball in A's backcourt. RULING: Legal. There is no violation since player and team control had not been established in team A's backcourt becore the ball went into Team A's backcourt."

Player and team control in frontcourt necessary for a violation.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Player and team control in frontcourt necessary for a violation.

So I've apparently never noted/grasped the full text of 9-9-1 before. Frightening.

Thanks for the help, everyone.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

So I've apparently never noted/grasped the full text of 9-9-1 before. Frightening.

Thanks for the help, everyone.

For some personal closure, I've figured out why I had forgotten that PC was needed for this in NFHS, and it's because PC isn't required in the frontcourt in NCAA for a BC violation.

"NCAA Rule 9 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."

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

For some personal closure, I've figured out why I had forgotten that PC was needed for this in NFHS, and it's because PC isn't required in the frontcourt in NCAA for a BC violation.

"NCAA Rule 9 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."

This part of the rule is the same in NFHS and in NCAA. PC in the FC is not required for either. PC INBOUNDS is required before the BC violation rule can be considered.

[APG]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Is this play wrong, then? And why am I on the strugglebus about this tonight?

Play # 5: "A1 has the ball for an endline throw-in in his/her frontcourt. A1's pass to A2, who is standing near the division line, is high and deflects off A2's hand and goes into the backcourt. A2 is then the first to control the ball in A's backcourt. RULING: Legal. There is no violation sinxe ayer and team control had not been established in team A's backcourt becore the ball went into Team A's backcourt."

Here's how you need to view team control during throw-ins...it only affects fouls by the throw-in team...we handle EVERYTHING else the exact same.

In the play above, because player control had not been established first, there is no backcourt violation (as well as 3 second violations or 10 second violations).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Here's how you need to view team control during throw-ins...it only affects fouls by the throw-in team...we handle EVERYTHING else the exact same.

In the play above, because player control had not been established first, there is no backcourt violation (as well as 3 second violations or 10 second violations).

So do the 3 second and 10 second counts now start on the first touch, even if it is only a deflection?

[APG]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So do the 3 second and 10 second counts now start on the first touch, even if it is only a deflection?

Nope, those counts do not start until there's been player control.

NFHS Basketball Interpretations 2011-2012

SITUATION 3: A1 has the ball for an end-line throw-in in his/her backcourt. The administering official reaches a four-second count when A1 passes the ball onto the court. A1’s pass to A2, who is also in Team A’s backcourt, takes several bounces and six seconds before A2 picks up and controls the ball.

RULING: Legal. Even though a team is now in control during a throw-in, the 10-second rule specifically requires that a player/ team be in continuous control in its backcourt for 10 seconds for a violation to occur. Technically speaking, the thrower-in is out of bounds and not located in the backcourt. (4-35-2; 9-8)

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Nope, those counts do not start until there's been player control.

NFHS Basketball Interpretations 2011-2012

SITUATION 3: A1 has the ball for an end-line throw-in in his/her backcourt. The administering official reaches a four-second count when A1 passes the ball onto the court. A1’s pass to A2, who is also in Team A’s backcourt, takes several bounces and six seconds before A2 picks up and controls the ball.

RULING: Legal. Even though a team is now in control during a throw-in, the 10-second rule specifically requires that a player/ team be in continuous control in its backcourt for 10 seconds for a violation to occur. Technically speaking, the thrower-in is out of bounds and not located in the backcourt. (4-35-2; 9-8)

The trouble is that, unlike the backcourt rule, the ten second rule was not revised. It doesn't say player and team control, but rather it still says neither a player nor his team may be in continuous control.....

A1's throw-in bounces off A2, then remains untouched in the backcourt for ten seconds.

?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

APG - It's the same reason the NCAA-M (@ Michigan State?) play you posted video of earlier this season was discussed and ruled an IW instead of the backcourt violation that was originally whistled by the trail.

It's the difference between Player Control, Player Control Inbounds and Team Control.

It's also the difference between BC violations and TC fouls (and the requirements for each).

edit: or what APG said.