Backcourt question

[Dave9819]

I was reading the rule book, and just want to make sure I am understanding correctly.

The rule book states that a player can jump from his/her front court, catch the ball while in the air, and land in their backcourt without committing a backcourt violation during a jump ball, throw-in, or while on defense.

So, if, on a throw-in by Team A, even if the ball is tipped by either team, Team B can jump from their front court, catch the ball in the air, and land in their backcourt with no violation?

Thanks!

[maven]

Correct. The throw in exception would no longer apply after a tip, but the defense exception would.

[APG]

I think that's incorrect...NFHS told us last year that we judge all backcourt plays as before and this was a backcourt violation before team control was added to the throw-in.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by Dave9819

I was reading the rule book, and just want to make sure I am understanding correctly.

The rule book states that a player can jump from his/her front court, catch the ball while in the air, and land in their backcourt without committing a backcourt violation during a jump ball, throw-in, or while on defense.

So, if, on a throw-in by Team A, even if the ball is tipped by either team, Team B can jump from their front court, catch the ball in the air, and land in their backcourt with no violation?

Thanks!

Check out 9-9-3 and Case Book 9.9.1 - "The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball."

[maven]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Check out 9-9-3 and Case Book 9.9.1 - "The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball."

THAT exception ends. But the exception for the defense remains in effect.

[APG]

Originally Posted by maven

THAT exception ends. But the exception for the defense remains in effect.

Again, I don't think this is true as I believe this was a backcourt violation before team control was added to the throw-in and that we're suppose to judge backcourt plays as we always have before.

[APG]

2007-2008 Basketball Interpretations:

SITUATION 7: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the team's backcourt (Team B's frontcourt). A1's throw-in is deflected by B1, who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from his/her frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team B. The throw-in ends with B1's deflection (legal touch). When B2 gains possession/ control in the air, he/she has frontcourt status. A backcourt violation has occurred when B2 lands in backcourt. (9-9-1; 9-9-3)

As far as I know that ruling hasn't changed, and since NFHS told us last year that we called backcourt plays as we have before even w/o team control added to the throw-in, I think the OP's play is technically a backcourt violation.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by APG

2007-2008 Basketball Interpretations:

SITUATION 7: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the team's backcourt (Team B's frontcourt). A1's throw-in is deflected by B1, who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from his/her frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team B. The throw-in ends with B1's deflection (legal touch). When B2 gains possession/ control in the air, he/she has frontcourt status. A backcourt violation has occurred when B2 lands in backcourt. (9-9-1; 9-9-3)

As far as I know that ruling hasn't changed, and since NFHS told us last year that we called backcourt plays as we have before even w/o team control added to the throw-in, I think the OP's play is technically a backcourt violation.

It seems that the case play and rule as written are contradictory on this scenario. Isn't B still on defense in this play? Even thought the throw in has ended because of B1's tip, B is still on defense as A still is in team control. B2 secures the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.
Article 3 states "During a jump ball, throw-in or while ON DEFENSE, a player MAY JUMP HIS/HER FRONTCOURT, SECURE CONTROL OF THE BALL WITH WITH BOTH FEET OFF THE FLOOR AND RETURN TO THE WITH ONE OR BOTH FEET IN THE BACKCOURT. the player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.

What am I missing?

[APG]

Don't believe NFHS considers anyone on offense and defense during a throw-in.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

It seems that the case play and rule as written are contradictory on this scenario. Isn't B still on defense in this play? Even thought the throw in has ended because of B1's tip, B is still on defense as A still is in team control. B2 secures the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt.
Article 3 states "During a jump ball, throw-in or while ON DEFENSE, a player MAY JUMP HIS/HER FRONTCOURT, SECURE CONTROL OF THE BALL WITH WITH BOTH FEET OFF THE FLOOR AND RETURN TO THE WITH ONE OR BOTH FEET IN THE BACKCOURT. the player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.

What am I missing?

No.

That element is referring to REAL team control. The whole definition of team control has been really confused by the NFHS.

Through the various interpretations and explanations that have been given by the NFHS, you can basically consider the defined "TEAM CONTROL" and everything that depends on team control to begin when a player holds or dribbles the ball in bounds (when player control begins). Separately, you can consider any foul by the throwing team during a throwin as a team control foul even though there is not actually "TEAM CONTROL".

What they're really after is two levels of team control....one that begins on the throwin and affects only fouls and another that begins when a player catches/dribbles the ball inbounds.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No.

That element is referring to REAL team control. The whole definition of team control has been really confused by the NFHS.

Through the various interpretations and explanations that have been given by the NFHS, you can basically consider the defined "TEAM CONTROL" and everything that depends on team control to begin when a player holds or dribbles the ball in bounds (when player control begins). Separately, you can consider any foul by the throwing team during a throwin as a team control foul even though there is not actually "TEAM CONTROL".

What they're really after is two levels of team control....one that begins on the throwin and affects only fouls and another that begins when a player catches/dribbles the ball inbounds.

Ok. Makes sense. Hope I remember all of it when it happens in a game.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by APG

2007-2008 Basketball Interpretations:

SITUATION 7: Team A is making a throw-in near the division line in the team's backcourt (Team B's frontcourt). A1's throw-in is deflected by B1, who is applying direct pressure on A1. B2 jumps from his/her frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team B. The throw-in ends with B1's deflection (legal touch). When B2 gains possession/ control in the air, he/she has frontcourt status. A backcourt violation has occurred when B2 lands in backcourt. (9-9-1; 9-9-3)

As far as I know that ruling hasn't changed, and since NFHS told us last year that we called backcourt plays as we have before even w/o team control added to the throw-in, I think the OP's play is technically a backcourt violation.

Until the NFHS defines offense and defense, this will always be an issue.

In spite of this interp, I agree with maven. I truly don't see why B1 wouldn't be considered a defender in this situation, which means that there's an exception and no violation has occurred, throw-in or not.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Until the NFHS defines offense and defense, this will always be an issue.

In spite of this interp, I agree with maven. I truly don't see why B1 wouldn't be considered a defender in this situation, which means that there's an exception and no violation has occurred, throw-in or not.

The interpretation makes no sense to me. Quite frankly, to me, it's an idiotic interpretation, especially in light of adding team control to the throw-in. To everyone who knows the game of basketball, the throw-in team is the offense and the other team is the defense. I'd also venture a guess that this play gets passed on more than it would get called.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by APG

The interpretation makes no sense to me. Quite frankly, to me, it's an idiotic interpretation, especially in light of adding team control to the throw-in. To everyone who knows the game of basketball, the throw-in team is the offense and the other team is the defense. I'd also venture a guess that this play gets passed on more than it would get called.

I know one who's going to pass on it.

[maven]

Originally Posted by bktballref

i know one who's going to pass on it.

+1