Back court violation?

[bob jenkins]

Your adding a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter (bouncing, between bounces, etc) that doesn't matter.

And, yes, it's been discussed ad nauseum since it came out, and it comes up several times per year.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Because they messed up the rule wording when they added TC during a throw-in.

Bingo. Backcourt was tough enough for rookies before the "change" but now it's just crazy.

Can the Official Forum do something about this? I send my Official Forum dues to Treasurer Mark Padgett every month, and I want the Forum to use that money to lobby the NFHS for a change in the rule to make the backcourt interpretation more consistent across all situations.

[deecee]

Safe to say, when you get the backcourt rule and its application, you get officiating and you get varsity games. Until then, call at your own discretion.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

crosscountry55- So if catch in the Fc with control and foot comes into the bc, then that is a violation. If both feet in the FC and then dribble in the BC then that is a violation? Say feet stay in the FC but ball doesn't. If the ball is dribbled on the division line but feet in the FC, that is not a violation?

So if catch in the Fc with control and foot comes into the bc, then that is a violation. YES

If both feet in the FC and then dribble in the BC then that is a violation? YES

Say feet stay in the FC but ball doesn't. If the ball is dribbled on the division line but feet in the FC, that is not a violation. It IS a violation. What I meant by the rule only applying to the dribbler is for a dribbler with BC status crossing the division line into FC. In this situation, all three points (2 feet + ball) apply. Let's say the dribbler backs into the front court and gets two feet on the FC side of the line but the ball keeps bouncing on the BC side. In this case the dribbler is still located in the BC. The moment his dribble first bounces on the FC side, the ball now has FC status, and any subsequent dribble on or behind the line would be a BC violation.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Rich1

A1 dribbling in the BC, near the FC being guarded by B1 who is standing in the FC. (TC is now established).
B1 swipes at and tips the ball into the air. (FC status is now established)
A2 catches the ball while standing in backcourt.

I'll have to dig out my old interps but unless I find something specific I am struggling with this being illigal because Team A was not the last to touch the ball in the front court and when A2 catches the ball he gives it BC status. I see this as no different than if B1 batted a dribbled ball into the back court.

If anyone has already dug up an old interp for this play a reference would be appreciated (and save me some time).

i dont have the play number but what it says is that when the ball is batted by B1 the ball gains FC status as you note. when it is in the air, IT still has frontcourt status. A2 touches a ball that has FC status and he also gives it BC status when he does it. his single touch of the ball is simultaneously the last to touch FC and first to touch BC. that's the play reasoning. bad play...

[Rich1]

Originally Posted by BigCat

A2 touches a ball that has FC status and he also gives it BC status when he does it. his single touch of the ball is simultaneously the last to touch FC and first to touch BC. that's the play reasoning. bad play...

It seems the major factor is when/how the ball is recovered. Catching it before it hits the floor in the BC is a violation but gathering it after it has hit the floor is not. Still seems contradictory to the exceptions but at least there is enough of a distinction there to ease my mind.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Rich1

It seems the major factor is when/how the ball is recovered. Catching it before it hits the floor in the BC is a violation but gathering it after it has hit the floor is not. Still seems contradictory to the exceptions but at least there is enough of a distinction there to ease my mind.

the wording of the backcourt rule says player cant be first to touch ball after it been in team control in FC if he or teammate last touched it in front court BEFORE IT WENT TO BC.

the play ruling says the single touch by A2 is simultaneously touching it in FC and BC---or at the same time. simultaneously is not BEFORE. the last player to touch it BEFORE it gained BC status was B. my thoughts.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BigCat

the wording of the backcourt rule says player cant be first to touch ball after it been in team control in FC if he or teammate last touched it in front court BEFORE IT WENT TO BC.

the play ruling says the single touch by A2 is simultaneously touching it in FC and BC---or at the same time. simultaneously is not BEFORE. the last player to touch it BEFORE it gained BC status was B. my thoughts.

A LOT of people's thoughts.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A LOT of people's thoughts.

yeah, it doesnt follow. i cant remember how old the play is and if the wording of the backcourt rule was different at the time.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BigCat

yeah, it doesnt follow. i cant remember how old the play is and if the wording of the backcourt rule was different at the time.

It wasn't. This interp is not that old. Maybe in the 2008-2010 range.

[so cal lurker]

I know it is an unusual context, but I'm curious: do y'all follow that interp, or do you consider it an archaic piece of misguided history?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rich1

It seems the major factor is when/how the ball is recovered. Catching it before it hits the floor in the BC is a violation but gathering it after it has hit the floor is not. Still seems contradictory to the exceptions but at least there is enough of a distinction there to ease my mind.

So, let me propose this scenario:

A1 is dribbling in the BC. B1, standing completely in the FC, swipes at the ball knocking it a) into A1's leg, or b) off of A2's (in the BC) leg.

Do you have a violation in either a or b?

If not, do you restart your 10 second count and then begin again?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I know it is an unusual context, but I'm curious: do y'all follow that interp, or do you consider it an archaic piece of misguided history?

Well, Jon L just said the play is a violation in NCAAW, so ....

Edit:

Jon has revised his answer and this play IS NOT a violation in NCAAW.

Now if only the FED will follow suit.

[Rich1]

Originally Posted by Adam

So, let me propose this scenario:

A1 is dribbling in the BC. B1, standing completely in the FC, swipes at the ball knocking it a) into A1's leg, or b) off of A2's (in the BC) leg.

Do you have a violation in either a or b?

If not, do you restart your 10 second count and then begin again?

I've been pondering this whole discussion and will share more thoughts in another post, but based on these deep ponderings:

No violation in a) since B1 was last to touch. Start a new 10 count as soon as ball obtains BC status.

Violation in b) if Team A is first to touch in BC.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rich1

I've been pondering this whole discussion and will share more thoughts in another post, but based on these deep ponderings:

No violation in a) since B1 was last to touch. Start a new 10 count as soon as ball obtains BC status.

Violation in b) if Team A is first to touch in BC.

Why would you have those as different? Either you believe the interp and they are both a violation, or you don't believe the interp and they are both legal.