Backcourt Violation Question

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Duffman

This is an interesting thought. I guess IMO there is a difference between when control begins, and when it can be first ascertained. For example...

A loose ball that A1 dives for, puts two hands on it, and as he’s sliding he calls time out. I'm reluctant to grant the request until he stops sliding, and I can determine that he's maintained control throughout. Just because he has two hands on the ball doesn't mean he has control of it. That said once the time out has been granted where did he gain control, when he first put two hands on it, halfway through, not until the end?

There's nothing magical about sliding and ending the slide. If he has both hands on it and the ball isn't rolling, then he is holding the ball.

In my judgment, based on the entire sequence of events leading up to and after initial contact with ball (in reality only a second) the player established control with the first dribble and maintained it the entire time, thus player control began with the first touch.

In your OP, A1 had player control and team A had team control when A1 had the ball in the BC.

The ball gained FC status.

A2 bats the ball and it gains BC status.

If you deemed the bat a dribble, it's a BC violation.

If you judged the first touch was not a dribble (no player control), then it's a BC violation if A2 next touches the ball again.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

There's nothing magical about sliding and ending the slide. If he has both hands on it and the ball isn't rolling, then he is holding the ball.



In your OP, A1 had player control and team A had team control when A1 had the ball in the BC.

The ball gained FC status.

A2 bats the ball and it gains BC status.

If you deemed the bat a dribble, it's a BC violation.

If you judged the first touch was not a dribble (no player control), then it's a BC violation if A2 next touches the ball again.

Hmmmm so you are saying that the only debate is when the BCV occurred... on the first dribble when the ball hit the half court stripe or when the players foot made contact with the BC. I agree... now.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Hmmmm so you are saying that the only debate is when the BCV occurred... on the first dribble when the ball hit the half court stripe or when the players foot made contact with the BC. I agree... now.

Unless he is holding the ball, when/if his feet hit the backcourt is of no consequence. It's a violation when he touches the ball (first) after it went into the bc.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

There's nothing magical about sliding and ending the slide. If he has both hands on it and the ball isn't rolling, then he is holding the ball.



In your OP, A1 had player control and team A had team control when A1 had the ball in the BC.

The ball gained FC status.

A2 bats the ball and it gains BC status.

If you deemed the bat a dribble, it's a BC violation.

If you judged the first touch was not a dribble (no player control), then it's a BC violation if A2 next touches the ball again.

BBR, Please see Camron's post, #38. It can't be a bcv when the ball hits the bc, from a bat, or a perceived "start of a dribble", because the bat occurs before the ball touches the backcourt, and a violation occurs for being the first to touch the ball, after the ball gains backcourt status. IOW, the bat that causes the ball to touch the backcourt, is only that. It's the touch, when the ball bounces up, and again, touches the hand of the player, which occurs after the ball gains backcourt status, that constitutes a bcv.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

There's nothing magical about sliding and ending the slide. If he has both hands on it and the ball isn't rolling, then he is holding the ball.

No there is nothing magical about sliding, or dribbling either for that matter. My point is I don't think PC can be determined by looking at a still snap shot that encompases only that exact moment in time. PC is determined by a sequence of events that when put together give you a full picture. In the situation I had it was not possible to determin control until after the second and subsequent dribbles occured, however once they did it was easy to say she gained control with the first dribble.

The same is true if she would have caugth the ball with two hands. A player can momentarily secure or stop the momentum of the ball with two hands on either side it. What follows will determin if the player has control. The player can either continue to demonstrate control over the ball by raising it above thier heads and holding it away from the defense, or the player can have the ball immediately squirt out of their hands.

In the former you have PC, in the latter you dont, but both would look identical if you froze action when they first placed two hands on the opposit sides of the ball. It's the action prior to, and after the instant of that first touch that determins PC.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

BBR, Please see Camron's post, #38. It can't be a bcv when the ball hits the bc, from a bat, or a perceived "start of a dribble", because the bat occurs before the ball touches the backcourt, and a violation occurs for being the first to touch the ball, after the ball gains backcourt status. IOW, the bat that causes the ball to touch the backcourt, is only that. It's the touch, when the ball bounces up, and again, touches the hand of the player, which occurs after the ball gains backcourt status, that constitutes a bcv.

Sorry but I don't agree with that interpretation. Player control exists so when a player in his FC steps on the line, it's a violation whether he's touching the ball or not. If he dribbles the ball on the line, it's no different. I have a BC violation.

You're welcome to another interpretation if you like.

Originally Posted by Duffman

No there is nothing magical about sliding, or dribbling either for that matter. My point is I don't think PC can be determined by looking at a still snap shot that encompases only that exact moment in time. PC is determined by a sequence of events that when put together give you a full picture. In the situation I had it was not possible to determin control until after the second and subsequent dribbles occured, however once they did it was easy to say she gained control with the first dribble.

The same is true if she would have caugth the ball with two hands. A player can momentarily secure or stop the momentum of the ball with two hands on either side it. What follows will determin if the player has control. The player can either continue to demonstrate control over the ball by raising it above thier heads and holding it away from the defense, or the player can have the ball immediately squirt out of their hands.

In the former you have PC, in the latter you dont, but both would look identical if you froze action when they first placed two hands on the opposit sides of the ball. It's the action prior to, and after the instant of that first touch that determins PC.

I disagree.

Based on your description, one dribble would never be a dribble.

Further, just because a player controls the ball and then loses control doesn't mean they never controlled it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Sorry but I don't agree with that interpretation. Player control exists so when a player in his FC steps on the line, it's a violation whether he's touching the ball or not. If he dribbles the ball on the line, it's no different. I have a BC violation.

Perhaps the same concept is intended to apply at the division line. However, the only rule close to that is one regarding OOB. It doesn't mention the division line or imply that it should be used elsewhere.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Sorry but I don't agree with that interpretation. Player control exists so when a player in his FC steps on the line, it's a violation whether he's touching the ball or not. If he dribbles the ball on the line, it's no different. I have a BC violation.

You're welcome to another interpretation if you like.

So if A1 is in the front court and throws the ball into the backcourt you would call a BC violation as soon as it hits the backcourt? If the ball hits the line but the player never touches it again it can't be a BC violation.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So if A1 is in the front court and throws the ball into the backcourt you would call a BC violation as soon as it hits the backcourt? If the ball hits the line but the player never touches it again it can't be a BC violation.

Do you truly believe a player that passes the ball into the BC has player control?

If so, you really need to re-read Rule 4, Definitions.

A dribble is not a pass. That's in Rule 4, too.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Do you truly believe a player that passes the ball into the BC has player control?

If so, you really need to re-read Rule 4, Definitions.

A dribble is not a pass. That's in Rule 4, too.

First, you don't have to have PC to have a BC violation. Team control is sufficient.

Second, muff it, lose control, fumble, pass, or just stop dribbling while running toward backcourt and then letting the ball continue into the backcourt with out touching it are all the same thing.

I am just saying someone on the offense would have to touch it after it touches the mid court line or in the backcourt before a BC violation should be called.

You should probably consider all of them a loose ball per the definition in Rule 4.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So if A1 is in the front court and throws the ball into the backcourt you would call a BC violation as soon as it hits the backcourt? If the ball hits the line but the player never touches it again it can't be a BC violation.

He didn't say "throw", he said "bat" as part of a dribble.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

He didn't say "throw", he said "bat" as part of a dribble.

This is the same as the old illegal dribble question.

A1 has ended his dribble, and then pushes the ball to the floor again. Is it a violation as soon as he pushes it down, or when it hits his hand?

Or the OOB call:
A1 dribbling along the sideline. After he pushes a dribble down, he steps on the line. Is it a violation as soon as he steps on the line, or when he touches the ball again thus estalishing the continuation of his dribble?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Or the OOB call:
A1 dribbling along the sideline. After he pushes a dribble down, he steps on the line. Is it a violation as soon as he steps on the line, or when he touches the ball again thus estalishing the continuation of his dribble?

On that one, we have a specific "Note" in the rule book that says it is OOB when a dribbler steps OOB whether they're touching the ball or not. We don't have a similar rule regarding the division line. Does the concept apply? By letter of the rule, no. By spirit, probably.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I disagree.

Based on your description, one dribble would never be a dribble.

Further, just because a player controls the ball and then loses control doesn't mean they never controlled it.

Not true. I have on many occasions called a player for a double dribble after they have gained control of a lose ball using a dribble, caught it with two hands, and attempted to dribble again. It's all about judgement, and I feel in some cases a play needs to develop before you can ascertain player control.