Backcourt Violation Question

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

This is correct, perfect, and thanks.

It's nice to know I got the call right, but unfortunate that I didn't get it right for 100% the right reasons.

Another point to consider is that the 3 points rule for dribblers only applies to a dribbler going from BC to FC; not the other way around. So if you deemed A2's actions to be a dribble, he did establish PC in the FC just prior to the ball bouncing in the BC.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Another point to consider is that the 3 points rule for dribblers only applies to a dribbler going from BC to FC; not the other way around. So if you deemed A2's actions to be a dribble, he did establish PC in the FC just prior to the ball bouncing in the BC.

Correct, which was my thinking on why it was a BCV, although it looks like now I was over thinking it. The coaches argument stemmed from judgment on what constitues control. I judged the player to have control immediately based on the nature of the initial contact and the actions proceeding it. The HC argued that control couldn't exist until after that second dribble at which time the ball had BC status.

As I understand the rule now is that once team control is established anywhere on the court, the ball achieves front court status, and is touched last in the FC by the offensive team, and first in the BC by the offensive team, that it is a BCV.

Am I learning anything?

[La Rikardo]

So for a ball to have front-court status, it simply needs to touch a player in the front court, right?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

So for a ball to have front-court status, it simply needs to touch a player in the front court, right?

Or the floor. 4-4-1

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

So for a ball to have front-court status, it simply needs to touch a player in the front court, right?

It must either touch the court or a player in fc to have status.

[Jesse James]

Still with the hijacked-thread-inbound-pass play--Dribbler's first bounce hits the division line in the OP.

Since a dribbler needs two feet and the ball in frontcourt for frontcourt status, then how is it a backcourt violation?

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Dribbler's first bounce hits the division line in the OP.

If a dribbler needs two feet and the ball in frontcourt for frontcourt status, then how is it a backcourt violation?

The ball was touched by B2 who was in the FC prior to A2 dribbling it, giving it FC status.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Still with the hijacked-thread-inbound-pass play--Dribbler's first bounce hits the division line in the OP.

If a dribbler needs two feet and the ball in frontcourt for frontcourt status, then how is it a backcourt violation?

Three points only applies to a dribbler going from BC to FC, not the other direction.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

It must either touch the court or a player in fc to have status.

Or an official or the backboard/rim.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Or an official or the backboard/rim.

Which are already considered part of the floor :P

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

So for a ball to have front-court status, it simply needs to touch a player in the front court, right?

Read 4-Ball Location to get your answer.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Correct, which was my thinking on why it was a BCV, although it looks like now I was over thinking it. The coaches argument stemmed from judgment on what constitues control. I judged the player to have control immediately based on the nature of the initial contact and the actions proceeding it. The HC argued that control couldn't exist until after that second dribble at which time the ball had BC status.

As I understand the rule now is that once team control is established anywhere on the court, the ball achieves front court status, and is touched last in the FC by the offensive team, and first in the BC by the offensive team, that it is a BCV.

Am I learning anything?

Yes, I would only add that due to the changes in TC on a throw in, PC needs to be established inbounds prior to or concurrent with the FC location of the ball.

As for the coach's argument. The dribble starts when the ball is batted, pushed, or thrown to the floor. We don't always know if it's a dribble or pass until the player touches it again, but that doesn't change when the dribble started (and thus PC began).

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Correct, which was my thinking on why it was a BCV, although it looks like now I was over thinking it. The coaches argument stemmed from judgment on what constitues control. I judged the player to have control immediately based on the nature of the initial contact and the actions proceeding it. The HC argued that control couldn't exist until after that second dribble at which time the ball had BC status.

As I understand the rule now is that once team control is established anywhere on the court, the ball achieves front court status, and is touched last in the FC by the offensive team, and first in the BC by the offensive team, that it is a BCV.

Am I learning anything?

"control immediately based on the nature of the initial contact and the actions proceeding it"

When would you have allowed A1 or a teammate/coach to request a time-out and honor that request? That is when team-control existed.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

"control immediately based on the nature of the initial contact and the actions proceeding it"

When would you have allowed A1 or a teammate/coach to request a time-out and honor that request? That is when team-control existed.

I think you mean player control.

[SamIAm]

"control immediately based on the nature of the initial contact and the actions proceeding it"

When would you have allowed A1 or a teammate/coach to request a time-out and honor that request? That is when team-control existed.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I think you mean player control.

I didn't. But they would occurr at the same instance in the OP and the sitch below.

If no team control exists for team A, the first player on team A to establish player control also establishes team control.

(Not trying to lecture, but putting my understanding out there to be corrected if needed)