Backcourt?

[OKREF]

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]

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

[jTheUmp]

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]

Originally Posted by letemplay

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

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

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]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

That's not true.

According to the wording of the rule, it is.

[OKREF]

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]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

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 established after the throw-in.

Fixed it for you.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by OKREF

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]

Originally Posted by OKREF

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]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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]

Originally Posted by letemplay

AFTER '11-'12 books came out?

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

[letemplay]

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]

Originally Posted by letemplay

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.