Backcourt on "controlled tap"?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

We really need to get the phrase "controlled tap" out of our vocabulary. So many people, including officials, use this phrase, but there's no such thing in basketball. The only way to control the ball, by rule, is to HOLD or DRIBBLE a live ball. That's it. That's the list.

If we just forget about a "controlled tap" and ask whether the ball was held or dribbled, we'll be a lot better off.

Absolutely correct. Of course, the new wording of the rule notwithstanding, the action described in the OP is indeed a violation.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Absolutely correct. Of course, the new wording of the rule notwithstanding, the action described in the OP is indeed a violation.

How? When did B get team control with FC status?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

How? When did B get team control with FC status?

The OP was "Team B steals the ball" -- that could be (depending on what was meant) control.

The rest of the criteria (FC, last to touch, first to touch) were clearly met. Note that "PC in the FC" is NOT needed. Since the OP was asking about "a controlled tap", maybe the rest of us were confused about whether "steal" already meant "control."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The OP was "Team B steals the ball" -- that could be (depending on what was meant) control.

The rest of the criteria (FC, last to touch, first to touch) were clearly met. Note that "PC in the FC" is NOT needed. Since the OP was asking about "a controlled tap", maybe the rest of us were confused about whether "steal" already meant "control."

That could be it. I missed that wording.

[just another ref]

It was pointed out.

Originally Posted by just another ref

When you say B stole the ball, if they gained control at that point, your situation is a violation.

[refiator]

Team B did indeed control in their BC after the steal. Partners and I disagreed over the violation being called based on the fact that Team B did not actually catch, hence "control" in the FC. I ruled violation based on the ball being "pushed" to a teammate from the BC to the FC.
Thanks for the input.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by refiator

Team B did indeed control in their BC after the steal. Partners and I disagreed over the violation being called based on the fact that Team B did not actually catch, hence "control" in the FC. I ruled violation based on the ball being "pushed" to a teammate from the BC to the FC.
Thanks for the input.

Sounds like a violation then...it was unclear in the OP whether the steal was merely deflection or a catch. Since you're saying it was a catch, the manner in which the ball then moved around is irrelevant....only who touched it in which part of the court and in which order.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Note that "PC in the FC" is NOT needed.

Are you sure?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Are you sure?

By rule, it is. But do they want us to call it by rule?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The rest of the criteria (FC, last to touch, first to touch) were clearly met. Note that "PC in the FC" is NOT needed.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Are you sure?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

By rule, it is. But do they want us to call it by rule?

That's precisely why I wrote, "the new wording of the rule notwithstanding."

I'm not calling it by the new wording. I'm using the old as directed in the NFHS powerpoint presentation.

[Raymond]

Why is there confusion? Team B "stole" the ball in their backcourt. The ball was then knocked off B1's leg into the front court and last touched by Team B before heading to the backcourt.