The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Backcourt? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/93761-backcourt.html)

OKREF Tue Jan 29, 2013 09:36am

Backcourt?
 
A1 has a throw in on the endline in the backcourt. A1 passes to A2 in the frontcourt, ball hits A2 on leg and goes into the backcourt. A1 gets the ball. Official calls backcourt. Correct? My first inclination is to say it isn't.

letemplay Tue Jan 29, 2013 09:43am

Go with your inclination. 4.12.2 (b) No player or team control established in frontcourt

jTheUmp Tue Jan 29, 2013 09:44am

Play on. There can be no backcourt violation until Team Control and Player Control are established in the frontcourt.

In this case, you had neither TC nor PC in the frontcourt.

bob jenkins Tue Jan 29, 2013 09:49am

Quote:

Originally Posted by letemplay (Post 875298)
Go with your inclination. 4.12.2 (b) No player or team control established in frontcourt

Quote:

Originally Posted by jTheUmp (Post 875299)
Play on. There can be no backcourt violation until Team Control and Player Control are established in the frontcourt.

In this case, you had neither TC nor PC in the frontcourt.

That's not true.

Adam Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:16am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 875303)
That's not true.

According to the wording of the rule, it is.

OKREF Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:31am

9.9.1 C

A1 dribbling in backcourt passes to frontcourt and A2 touches or deflects it back to backcourt where A2 recovers.

Ruling is backcourt.

This says that when A2 touched it in the frontcourt, even though they didn't "posses" the ball, that touching constituted player control, and this is a backcourt. But in the OP, it is a throw in and since there is no player control during a throw in I would say it isn't a backcourt.

Raymond Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:34am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jTheUmp (Post 875299)
Play on. There can be no backcourt violation until Team Control and Player Control are established in the frontcourt.

In this case, you had neither TC nor PC <strike>in the frontcourt</strike> established after the throw-in.

Fixed it for you.

Raymond Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:36am

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 875320)
9.9.1 C

A1 dribbling in backcourt passes to frontcourt and A2 touches or deflects it back to backcourt where A2 recovers.

Ruling is backcourt.

This says that when A2 touched it in the frontcourt, even though they didn't "posses" the ball, that touching constituted player control, and this is a backcourt. But in the OP, it is a throw in and since there is no player control during a throw in I would say it isn't a backcourt.

A1's dribbling constituted PC, not A2's touch in the FC.

bob jenkins Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:48am

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 875320)
9.9.1 C

A1 dribbling in backcourt passes to frontcourt and A2 touches or deflects it back to backcourt where A2 recovers.

Ruling is backcourt.

This says that when A2 touched it in the frontcourt, even though they didn't "posses" the ball, that touching constituted player control, and this is a backcourt. But in the OP, it is a throw in and since there is no player control during a throw in I would say it isn't a backcourt.

Yes, there is. Note that they removed "inbounds" from 4-12-1 a couple of years ago.

(It doesn't change your ruling, though.)

OKREF Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:50am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 875331)
Yes, there is. Note that they removed "inbounds" from 4-12-1 a couple of years ago.

(It doesn't change your ruling, though.)

Ahh. You're right.

letemplay Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:07am

What's a "couple"?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 875331)
Yes, there is. Note that they removed "inbounds" from 4-12-1 a couple of years ago.

(It doesn't change your ruling, though.)

AFTER '11-'12 books came out?

bob jenkins Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:13am

Quote:

Originally Posted by letemplay (Post 875341)
AFTER '11-'12 books came out?

I'm thinking either 10-11 or 11-12.

letemplay Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:18am

Still, as you say, doesnt change the ruling, right? Am I correct, and we all agree (well that might be taking it too far) that this play is NOT a backcourt v?

ODog Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:55am

Quote:

Originally Posted by letemplay (Post 875345)
Am I correct, and we all agree (well that might be taking it too far) that this play is NOT a backcourt v?

You're correct. Under no circumstances is the scenario in your OP a backcourt violation. Case closed.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:21am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1