Purdue v. Michigan Backcourt violation

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Do you think the T might have held up on making the call because he saw the C giving a tip signal? I ask because the ball was in the C's primary at the start. The ball starts heading towards BC and the T isn't sure why. He sees the tip signal and freezes up.

Again, just a theory. Not foolproof given A1 ended up bringing the ball into the backcourt anyway but just a thought.

Not relevant as the only tip the C could have been signaling was before the next contact by the offense as the signal was already past by the time the offensive player contact the the ball in the FC. When the offense then touched the ball again, the T had everything he needed to know. I've seen too many cases where it is only one official involved where they still don't call that a violation. Some just don't understand the rule...they think that a defensive tip absolves the offense from a backcourt violation regardless of what else happens. That, I believe, is the case in the NBA, but not NCAA or NFHS.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not relevant as the only tip the C could have been signaling was before the next contact by the offense as the signal was already past by the time the offensive player contact the the ball in the FC. When the offense then touched the ball again, the T had everything he needed to know. I've seen too many cases where it is only one official involved where they still don't call that a violation. Some just don't understand the rule...they think that a defensive tip absolves the offense from a backcourt violation regardless of what else happens. That, I believe, is the case in the NBA, but not NCAA or NFHS.

In the NBA, a tip by the defense ends team control...thus why this isn't a violation in the NBA and why at other levels, officials will catch grief for (correctly) calling this a violation.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by APG

In the NBA, a tip by the defense ends team control...thus why this isn't a violation in the NBA and why at other levels, officials will catch grief for (correctly) calling this a violation.

At the FED and NCAA levels if this were a long rebound would we consider A1 to be in PC when he dribbled the ball into the backcourt?

[APG]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

At the FED and NCAA levels if this were a long rebound would we consider A1 to be in PC when he dribbled the ball into the backcourt?

I wouldn't split hairs that closely if this was off a rebound. I'd have A1 gaining player control in the backcourt.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by APG

I wouldn't split hairs that closely if this was off a rebound. I'd have A1 gaining player control in the backcourt.

Agreed. THe first dribble the ball hit in the BC, so the three-points rule applies and A1 is in the BC.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Agreed. THe first dribble the ball hit in the BC, so the three-points rule applies and A1 is in the BC.

Huh?

Player control, and thus team control, doesn't begin until the first dribble hits the floor?

Doesn't the 3 points rule apply coming from BC to FC and not visa versa?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Huh?

Player control, and thus team control, doesn't begin until the first dribble hits the floor?

Doesn't the 3 points rule apply coming from BC to FC and not visa versa?

I can see where bob is coming from.

PC, TC, and the dribble all start at the same time since there was never a catch so he is considering that the entire play is during a a dribble and subject to the 3-points rule. I can buy that as there really isn't anything to say that there any one is considered to have happened first.