Backcourt violation or not???
 

I know this might be considered a HTBT moment, but try your best to imagine and lets throw around a few situations that may alter the thinking.

A1 has a throw in on the sideline about 10 feet in the frontcourt. They throw the ball to A2 who has one feet in the front court and one foot in the air stepping to the backcourt. While the feet are in this manner the ball comes to rest in one hand as the ball is being thrown towards the backcourt.

By rule if there is team control in the front, which we may consider if the ball comes to rest in the hand then we would have a backcourt violation.

At what point do we consider team control with only one hand?

Once A2 touches the ball, his location determines the location of the ball. One foot down in the FC, and nothing touching the BC means he has FC location.
Since he catches it, you have TC at that location.

You said he throws it towards the backcourt. What does that mean?

I think you need to chanel your inner-Stewart Potter.*

In real-time, I suspect it will be rare that you are going to conclude that a player in the process of moving across the midcourt line had possession in just one hand before touching in the BC.

___
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

At the time where you'd start a 5-second count, if the player was closely guarded.

At the time where you'd grant a TO, if it was requested.

At the time where you'd have the foot that's down be the pivot foot and start the travel restrictions.

At the time where you'd start a 10-second count, if the player was in the BC.

Or -- sometimes you just need to officiate.

Like you said, you had to be there.

You said he throws it towards the backcourt. What does that mean?[/QUOTE]

What I mean is that the throw in is about ten feet in the frontcourt. Therefore when the ball gets thrown the momentum of A2 carries him from the front court to the backcourt.

Thanks for the thoughts. This is tough as the team control happens slightly before the player moves into the backcourt. The player is caught in a tough position.

Then the inbounder shouldn't throw the ball there -- throw it farther into the BC

9.9.1 SITUATION A:

A1 catches the throw-in pass with one foot on the floor in A's frontcourt and the other foot not touching the floor. The non-pivot foot then comes down in A's backcourt.

RULING: Violation. Player and team control are established in A's frontcourt when A1 catches the throw-in pass. The violation occurs when A1 subsequently touches the backcourt with the non-pivot foot. (4-12-6; 9-9-3)

There are accommodations for airborne players performing usual landing actions. There are no provisions for momentum.

So A2 catches the ball in motion, but with one foot on the floor in the FC and proceeds to step with the other foot into the BC.

If you think A2 actually had control of the ball (see bob's guidelines above) before the 2nd foot came down in the BC, you have a violation.

In practice, as socal notes, it's going to be have be very clear (almost happening in slow motion) before this will get called.

When you call it, be ready for the 3 points comments from the coaches.

Coaches around here aren't that smart. They won't know to even think about "3 points" unless there was a discussion about it earlier in the game. But not much earlier. :D

This was the thought I had while reading the OP and responses. If the player isn't airborne, then violation, but if they land normally after catching the ball in the air, and the front court foot lands before the back court foot, then play on.

👍