Backcourt violation?

[gfortner16]

Team A is shooting a free throw. Team B rebounds the ball and makes a pass to a teammate in the front court. The pass hits the leg of Team B in the front court by the free throw line. The ball rolls back to the backcourt. Team B is the first to touch the ball in the backcourt. What is the call?

[ballgame99]

backcourt violation.

[jTheUmp]

Break it down:
a) Does Team B have team control in-bounds? (yes)
b) Does the ball gain frontcourt status when it touches the B player's leg? (yes)
c) Was Team B last to touch the ball while it was in the frontcourt (yes, by your description)
d) Was Team B first to touch the ball after it went into the backcourt? (yes)

Since all of those things are true, we have a backcourt violation. If any of those things are not true, you would not have a backcourt violation.

[bob jenkins]

PC Inbounds? Yes
Last to touch before going to BC? Yes
First to touch after going to BC? Yes

Any exceptions apply? No.

So, it's a violation

[egj13]

Not disputing here...but why is the play above different than this play?

A1 has the ball for an end-line throw-in in his/her frontcourt. A1’s pass to A2, who is in the frontcourt standing near the division line, is high and deflects off A2’s hand and goes into Team A’s backcourt. A2 is then the first to control the ball in Team A’s backcourt. RULING: Legal. There is no backcourt violation since player and team control had not yet been established in Team A’s frontcourt before the ball went into Team A’s backcourt. The throw-in ends when A2 legally touches the ball, but the backcourt count does not start until A2 gains control in his/her backcourt.

So on a throw in, touch does not constitute control, but on a throw from BC to FC, touch does constitute control. Should be the same if you ask me...

I get where NFHS says it isn't the same...but I wish it was just for ease of consistency.

[jTheUmp]

Your situation is different precisely because it's a throw-in.

[egj13]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

Your situation is different precisely because it's a throw-in.

Yeah my opening sentence is misleading. I know why it is different, I know where NFHS says it is different I am just wondering aloud...not necessarily right by any means...why it can't be the same for ease of application.

I had both situations happen in the same game the other night...explaining the difference to a coach in a heated 2 point conference game is not the easiest...come on NFHS, work with me here!

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by egj13

Not disputing here...but why is the play above different than this play?

A1 has the ball for an end-line throw-in in his/her frontcourt. A1’s pass to A2, who is in the frontcourt standing near the division line, is high and deflects off A2’s hand and goes into Team A’s backcourt. A2 is then the first to control the ball in Team A’s backcourt. RULING: Legal. There is no backcourt violation since player and team control had not yet been established in Team A’s frontcourt before the ball went into Team A’s backcourt. The throw-in ends when A2 legally touches the ball, but the backcourt count does not start until A2 gains control in his/her backcourt.

So on a throw in, touch does not constitute control, but on a throw from BC to FC, touch does constitute control. Should be the same if you ask me...

I get where NFHS says it isn't the same...but I wish it was just for ease of consistency.

As jTheUmp answered, because the throw-in starts from out-of-bounds, there is no player or team control "in Team A's frontcourt." And until there is such control, there can be no backcourt violation.

Remember, that "player and team control during a throw-in" is relevant to fouls, and was specifically made part of the rule to overcome the double penalty of losing possession and possible bonus free throw(s) to the opponents, if the throw-in team committed a foul during the throw-in.

[DrPete]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

Your situation is different precisely because it's a throw-in.

That's not why it's different. The difference is that on the rebound situation, a player controlled the ball enough to make a pass-- that equates with team control in bounds in the front court. In the throw in situation, there is team control, but not team control in bounds. The deflected pass does not establish team control in bounds, where as the rebound and pass does.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by egj13

Yeah my opening sentence is misleading. I know why it is different, I know where NFHS says it is different I am just wondering aloud...not necessarily right by any means...why it can't be the same for ease of application.

I had both situations happen in the same game the other night...explaining the difference to a coach in a heated 2 point conference game is not the easiest...come on NFHS, work with me here!

Once the ball is inbounds, the offense has a choice of from where to throw the ball, so the requirements are stronger than on a throw-in where they don't get the choice.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

As jTheUmp answered, because the throw-in starts from out-of-bounds, there is no player or team control "in Team A's frontcourt." And until there is such control, there can be no backcourt violation.

I get what you're saying, but I'd just be careful with the "there's no team control" part here. There absolutely is when it's touched in bounds. In my experience, simplifying that play to its bare minimums makes it easiest to explain and understand. Saying "there has to be player control in the frontcourt" is accurate. Saying "there has to be player and team control in the frontcourt" is accurate, but the "team control" part is superfluous. And/because there absolutely is team control on a throw-in touched/tapped by anyone on the playing court, regardless of whether or not they've controlled it, per se.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Saying "there has to be player control in the frontcourt" is accurate.

Depending on the play, no it isn't. Note that A doesn't even need to touch the ball in the FC and you could have a violation.

[jeremy341a]

Why does 9-9-1 say there must be player control in the front court when there are interps that say otherwise? Should the rule be modified or are the interpretations wrong?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by egj13

Not disputing here...but why is the play above different than this play?

A1 has the ball for an end-line throw-in in his/her frontcourt. A1’s pass to A2, who is in the frontcourt standing near the division line, is high and deflects off A2’s hand and goes into Team A’s backcourt. A2 is then the first to control the ball in Team A’s backcourt. RULING: Legal. There is no backcourt violation since player and team control had not yet been established in Team A’s frontcourt before the ball went into Team A’s backcourt. The throw-in ends when A2 legally touches the ball, but the backcourt count does not start until A2 gains control in his/her backcourt.

So on a throw in, touch does not constitute control, but on a throw from BC to FC, touch does constitute control. Should be the same if you ask me...

I get where NFHS says it isn't the same...but I wish it was just for ease of consistency.

During a throw in, player control must be established in bounds before the BC restrictions begin. Why? Because they said they want the rule to be done just as it was before they added TC to a throw in.

In the OP, PC has been well established in bounds, and thus all the restrictions are in play.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jeremy341a

Why does 9-9-1 say there must be player control in the front court when there are interps that say otherwise? Should the rule be modified or are the interpretations wrong?

They keep jacking the rule up trying to fix the mistakes they didn't know they made by adding TC to the throw in.