The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 03:14pm
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
There's TC in both situations, Billy.

The difference is PC Inbounds.
True but in neither one is there PC in the front court which is what the rulebook says is required although their is a casebook play that says it isn't. My point is why not make it one way or the other? Either require player control to be established in the fc or not but rule it that way in both cases.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 04:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
True but in neither one is there PC in the front court which is what the rulebook says is required although their is a casebook play that says it isn't. My point is why not make it one way or the other? Either require player control to be established in the fc or not but rule it that way in both cases.
It is that way.

4 requirements:

1) PC inbounds
2) Ball in FC
3) A last to touch before ball goes to BC
4) A first to touch after ball goes to BC.

Note that 1 and 2 are separate items -- PC in the FC is not required.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 04:37pm
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
It is that way.

4 requirements:

1) PC inbounds
2) Ball in FC
3) A last to touch before ball goes to BC
4) A first to touch after ball goes to BC.

Note that 1 and 2 are separate items -- PC in the FC is not required.
Has the rule been recently rewrote? I see these 4 listed on here many times yet the rule says pc in the fc is required. Has the rule been altered to lead to this wording as I know there is casebook play that says it is not required?
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 05:08pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
Has the rule been recently rewrote? I see these 4 listed on here many times yet the rule says pc in the fc is required. Has the rule been altered to lead to this wording as I know there is casebook play that says it is not required?
The rule is different depending how long you've been officiating
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 05:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
That would have been the way to write the rule, but that's not the way the rule was written. There is TC and PC now during a throw-in.
But, that is exactly how they have described the case plays in interpretations surrounding the rule.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 06:37pm
Medium Kahuna
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: At home
Posts: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
Has the rule been recently rewrote? I see these 4 listed on here many times yet the rule says pc in the fc is required. Has the rule been altered to lead to this wording as I know there is casebook play that says it is not required?
The rule has indeed been rewritten. Here's the 2010 version of 9-9-1:

A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team
control in the frontcourt
, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by
the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

And the 2012 version:

A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in player
and team control in the frontcourt
, if he/she or a teammate last touched or
was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

We should amend the "four requirements" to three:

1. PC in FC
2. A last to touch in FC
3. A first to touch in BC
__________________
Never trust an atom: they make up everything.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 06:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by maven View Post
The rule has indeed been rewritten. Here's the 2010 version of 9-9-1:

A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team
control in the frontcourt
, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by
the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

And the 2012 version:

A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in player
and team control in the frontcourt
, if he/she or a teammate last touched or
was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

We should amend the "four requirements" to three:

1. PC in FC
2. A last to touch in FC
3. A first to touch in BC
That won't work because a pass from BC that touches a player in the FC and rebounds to the BC is a violation but there was never PC in the FC.

I agree with you (and always have) that the best thing to do is just reword the defintion of TC foul so that you can have a TC foul without TC, just like you can have a PC foul without PC.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 07:19pm
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by maven View Post
The rule has indeed been rewritten. Here's the 2010 version of 9-9-1:

A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team
control in the frontcourt
, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by
the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

And the 2012 version:

A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in player
and team control in the frontcourt
, if he/she or a teammate last touched or
was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

We should amend the "four requirements" to three:

1. PC in FC
2. A last to touch in FC
3. A first to touch in BC


The 3 points is how I read the current rule but the casebook seems to not agree. Is the casebook play old?
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 07:23pm
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
That won't work because a pass from BC that touches a player in the FC and rebounds to the BC is a violation but there was never PC in the FC.
.
Under the current wording of the rule this is not backcourt. However the casebook says it is.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 07:35pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
Under the current wording of the rule this is not backcourt. However the casebook says it is.
When the NFHS changed the TC rule, they changed this part of the bc rule in a stated attempt to ensure the bc rule wasn't effectively changed. They put out a memo essentially stating they wanted bc called as if the rules hadn't changed.

1. Not everyone got that powerpoint memo.

2. New officials start every year that don't get old memos.

3. They said they were going to fix it this year. They failed.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 07:45pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
Under the current wording of the rule this is not backcourt. However the casebook says it is.
This is not the only place where the casebook adds things which are not in the rulebook.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 08:00pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
Under the current wording of the rule this is not backcourt. However the casebook says it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
When the NFHS changed the TC rule, they changed this part of the bc rule in a stated attempt to ensure the bc rule wasn't effectively changed. They put out a memo essentially stating they wanted bc called as if the rules hadn't changed.

1. Not everyone got that powerpoint memo.

2. New officials start every year that don't get old memos.

3. They said they were going to fix it this year. They failed.
Thus Jeremy, why I say the rule depends on how long you've been officiating.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 08:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a View Post
The 3 points is how I read the current rule but the casebook seems to not agree. Is the casebook play old?
They have told us more than one time to rule other plays as they were before team control change regardless of the apparent wording of the rule.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 08:16pm
NFHS Official
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,734
The only thing that has changed is the team control only applies to an offensive foul during a throw in. At one time, free throws would have been shot. If the offense fouls during a throw in, it is a TC foul and no free throws shot.

Example: During a throw in, A1 sets an illegal screen on B1. Previously if B was in the bonus they would have shot free throws. Now they do not. It is penalized as a TC foul.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 01, 2013, 08:22pm
Often wrong never n doubt
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
Thus Jeremy, why I say the rule depends on how long you've been officiating.
I see and you can see my confusion as a first year official.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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
?? back court violation bbcowboy Basketball 15 Tue Dec 14, 2010 03:54pm
back court violation tag46176 Basketball 3 Sun Nov 02, 2008 03:12am
over and back violation? BEAREF Basketball 11 Sat Jan 20, 2007 04:01pm
back court violation or not????? jritchie Basketball 11 Wed Sep 22, 2004 11:22pm
Back court violation? Cyber-Ref Basketball 7 Fri Jan 17, 2003 09:54am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1