The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:36pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
That seems wrong.

So... by this case play if A1 releases the ball from the backcourt, it lands in the front court, and comes back to A1 in the backcourt, it's a violation...

But by the 3 points rule, if A1 is dribbling near the halfcourt line, is standing backcourt and releases the ball (to dribble) , it lands in the front court, and returns to A1's hands (as dribbles are apt to do) while A1 is still backcourt, you DON'T have a violation.

What's the difference (and what rule makes it different?)
Criteria for backcourt violation:

1. Team control (and player control established at some point if coming from a throw-in)
2. Ball achieves frontcourt status
3. Team in control is the last to touch the ball when it has a frontcourt status
4. Team in control is the first to touch after the ball gains a backcourt status

In your first situation, all four criteria are met. In your second, the ball doesn't achieve a frontcourt status per the 3 points rule for a dribbler.
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.

Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
It doesn't say on a throw-in, just after it has been in player and team control in the frontcourt. Is it possible that it is just written poorly and that is why there is a casebook play that is the opposite?
It's incredibly poorly written.

When they added team control during a throw-in they told us that the backcourt violation hadn't changed at all. But the rules for it changed. Our association continues to call the backcourt rule as it was, which is what the casebook play reflects.

It will be a problem with a coach who knows the rule and tries to press the issue. The only recourse you have is to point him to the casebook.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:44pm
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Seems to me that it would be easier if they applied the rule the same for all plays throw-ins or not.

Backcourt throw in by A1 goes the past half court and hits A2 in hands and returns to A3 in backcourt then no violaton as there had not been player control. However same play but A1 throws the ball from inbounds in the backcourt now we have a violation bc A1 had player control although it was in the backcourt. Correct?
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:45pm
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire View Post
It's incredibly poorly written.

When they added team control during a throw-in they told us that the backcourt violation hadn't changed at all. But the rules for it changed. Our association continues to call the backcourt rule as it was, which is what the casebook play reflects.

It will be a problem with a coach who knows the rule and tries to press the issue. The only recourse you have is to point him to the casebook.
Good thing is either way you call it you can either say look in the rule book or look in the casebook. I'm covered either way!
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 08:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Suwanee Georgia
Posts: 1,050
How About 9-9-2

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
How can I justify the call when the Coach states rule 9-9-1 and says there must be player control in the frontcourt?
9-9-2 is more to the OP. It states that a team with control in the backcourt can not cause the ball to get front court status (doesn't have to be in player control) and then cause it to go into the back court and be the first to touch it.

I paraphrased the rule, but that is the gist of it.
__________________
Gwinnett Umpires Association
Multicounty Softball Association
Multicounty Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 08:15am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwest View Post
9-9-2 is more to the OP. It states that a team with control in the backcourt can not cause the ball to get front court status (doesn't have to be in player control) and then cause it to go into the back court and be the first to touch it.

I paraphrased the rule, but that is the gist of it.
Except of course that it's not at all. 9-9-2 deals with a ball that goes frontcourt to backcourt "without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt." Since in the OP has the ball touching A2, 9-9-2 has not been violated. The violation has to come from 9-9-1 and that rule has been screwed up by the committee.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by APG View Post
Criteria for backcourt violation:

1. Team control (and player control established at some point if coming from a throw-in)
2. Ball achieves frontcourt status
3. Team in control is the last to touch the ball when it has a frontcourt status
4. Team in control is the first to touch after the ball gains a backcourt status

In your first situation, all four criteria are met. In your second, the ball doesn't achieve a frontcourt status per the 3 points rule for a dribbler.
How is the 2nd criteria met in the 1st situation? Both situations are identical... A1 is backcourt, ball leaves A1's hands, hits the ground in the frontcourt, and then returns to A1's hands.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
What's the difference (and what rule makes it different?)
4- ball location.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:47am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
How can I justify the call when the Coach states rule 9-9-1 and says there must be player control in the frontcourt?
You have a few options for that rare occasion when a coach actually knows the wording of the rule.

1. Silence.
2. "Coach, I'm using the 2010-2011 rule book for BC calls."
3. "Coach, the rule committee admitted they screwed this up, but they didn't fix it. They issued statements saying all BC situations were to be ruled as they were before they added TC to the throw-in."
4. "Because I said so."

Honestly, it's the same explanation I normally give them when they start complaining that B touched the ball once (prior to A2 touching it in the FC) before it went into the BC (you know the play). Nothing.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,842
Confession time....


Boys Varsity a few weeks ago...A1 near division line fires pass to A2 a few feet in frontcourt, pass hits A2 in back of head, ricochets back to A1 in backcourt (about 6 feet away). A1 passes to A3 who hits jumper. Whole scenario happened in 3-4 seconds. I'm trail and it froze me as seeing ball bounce off head was a first. By the time I digested it, called nothing. C was was right there and also froze. No reaction from crowd, B coach casually asks C as he's running by,"wasn't that backcourt"? "Yes" and we play on.

Expect the unexpected.

Added to list of that won't happen again on my part.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:31am
NFHS Official
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,734
Back court

9.9.1 case book, is this exact play.

A1 is dribbling in the backcourt and throws a pass to the frontcourt. While standing in A's frontcourt: (a) A2 touches the ball and deflects it back to A's backcourt. A2 recovers in the backcourt.

Ruling: In (a), it is a violation. The ball was in control of A1 and Team A, and a player from A was the last to touch the ball in the frontcourt and a player of A was the first to touch it after it returned to the backcourt
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:37am
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
OP already recognized and brought up case book play 9.9.1 Situation C
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
backcourt Ralph Stubenthal Basketball 16 Tue Jan 27, 2004 06:24pm
Backcourt? Ricejock Basketball 17 Mon Jan 26, 2004 01:54pm
Backcourt? Grail Basketball 2 Fri Jan 23, 2004 09:57am
backcourt A Pennsylvania Coach Basketball 8 Thu Jan 15, 2004 09:01am
Backcourt?? Rock'nRef Basketball 6 Wed Jan 15, 2003 10:42pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:28pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1