Backcourt Violation Question

[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)

[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 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)

The reason I questioned your phrase-ology is b/c you're discussing granting a time-out. When the ball is live but the clock is not running then merely having team control is sufficient to be granted a time-out. But when the ball is live and the clock in running then player control is needed.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The four criteria for a backcourt violation (NCAA and NFHS):

1. Team control (and initial player control when coming from a throw-in)
2. Ball achieves a front court status
3. Team in control is last to touch the ball before the ball achieves a backcourt status
4. Team in control is the first to touch the ball after the ball achieves a backcourt status.

A2 didn't need to establish player control. As soon as A2 touched the ball, he gave the ball frontcourt status. We still have team control because TC continues during passing activity. A2 then was the first to touched the ball after it gained a backcourt status (by virtue of batting the ball to the division line), and was the first to touch the ball after it achieved a backcourt status.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The reason I questioned your phrase-ology is b/c you're discussing granting a time-out. When the ball is live but the clock is not running then merely having team control is sufficient to be granted a time-out. But when the ball is live and the clock in running then player control is needed.

That, and in the OP, team control had already been established in the BC.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The reason I questioned your phrase-ology is b/c you're discussing granting a time-out. When the ball is live but the clock is not running then merely having team control is sufficient to be granted a time-out. But when the ball is live and the clock in running then player control is needed.

Huh? The only examples of "live ball, clock not running" I can think of are on a throw-in (no TC), FT (TC, but also PC), or jump ball (no TC).

A TO can be granted when there's PC or the ball is "at the disposal" of the team. TC does not enter into it (other than PC also causes TC).

Maybe I'm missing something.

[Adam]

Disposal now equals TC as well. Maybe that's what he meant.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Huh? The only examples of "live ball, clock not running" I can think of are on a throw-in (no TC), FT (TC, but also PC), or jump ball (no TC).

A TO can be granted when there's PC or the ball is "at the disposal" of the team. TC does not enter into it (other than PC also causes TC).

Maybe I'm missing something.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Disposal now equals TC as well. Maybe that's what he meant.

Snaqs, you are wise beyond your years. That's what I meant. No PC when the ball is at the disposal of the thrower-in but there is TC.

Even though I forgot to include there is one exception to "TC, live ball, clock not running" for which we can't grant a time-out, which is after the throw-in has been released but before it has been legally touched.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Even though I forgot to include there is one exception to "TC, live ball, clock not running" for which we can't grant a time-out, which is after the throw-in has been released but before it has been legally touched.

Which is why your method of trying to discern between when to use PC and when to use TC is confusing (to me).

Just go by the PC or disposal, all the time.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Snaqs, you are wise beyond your years.

You take that back; I'm no Yankee fan regardless of what you've been told.