3pts rule --not backcourt decision Louisville/Northern Iowa (Video)

[Nevadaref]

Anyone see the correct non-backcourt decision in the Louisville/Northern Iowa game with 2:10 to play? It was an excellent illustration of the three-points rule.
There is also a good replay immediately following the commercial break at 2:04.

[CNYREF]

Thought this was a really good no call. Tough one that many officials and some good ones might get wrong...

Good no-call by Doug Sirmons! Love how he ran over to the coach right away.

[mtn335]

I was there in person. As soon as I saw the feet in FC ball in BC situation I knew bad things were about to happen

Superbly handled by this official. And entirely misunderstood by the UNI HC and about 14,000 "officials" around the building

[so cal lurker]

Once upon a time, was it true that once one foot went into the FC it couldn't go back? Or has it always been a myth? (I know way back when I played I *believed* that once one foot crossed it couldn't go back.)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Once upon a time, was it true that once one foot went into the FC it couldn't go back? Or has it always been a myth? (I know way back when I played I *believed* that once one foot crossed it couldn't go back.)

I was taught the three points rule as a youngster. I'm not old, but I'm not young anymore, either.

[westneat]

Is there a video? I remember there perhaps being some question as to whether the dribble had ended with both feet in the frontcourt.

EDIT: Saw the video. Clearly the correct call.

[bfr]

westneat you bring up a key point which I want to be sure to learn from. I believe it is what made the play confusing, even to those with lots of experience. I am a total newbie and just trying to use these NCAA tournament examples to further my understanding of the rules.

As the player came across midcourt, he established both feet in the FC. The ball was never dribbled in the FC. As he was going to pick up his dribble he pivoted his left foot back into the BC BEFORE he secured the ball in both hands. He then pivoted on his right foot (the one still in the FC), placing his left foot down in the FC again.

Help me out/confirm my understanding please: this was legal per Rule 9, Sect 13, Art.3, c (??)

c. During a dribble from back court to front court, the ball shall be in the
front court when both feet of the dribbler and the ball touch the playing
court entirely in the front court.

Since all of this happened while the player maintained their dribble and the ball never touched in the FC...this was the correct call. The 3 points needed to establish FC status had not occurred.

This was a very bang/bang type of play with the picking up of the dribble happening while the player was moving their foot back into the back court.

When I saw it live I at first thought (as I think the coach and many others thought) he had established both feet in the FC and then picked up his dribble AND THEN pivoted his left foot back into the BC.

That would have been a violation, correct? Rule 9, Sect 13, Art.3, a (??)

a. A ball that is in contact with a player or with the playing court...shall be in the
front court when neither the ball nor the player is touching the back court.

The "3 points of contact" rule for BC/FC only applies to a player while dribbling.

So some other questions:
-once the player was pivoting on his right foot, and pivoted his left foot back into the FC, could he have continued pivoting and placed his left foot back into the BC again without a violation?

-at what point did the 10 second count end?
a) when the dribble had stopped and the foot in the FC was established as the pivot?
b) when the dribble had stopped and player pivoted so that both feet were in the FC?
c) when the pass was released?
d) when the pass was caught by a player who was established in the FC?

I'm going with a ;-)

And is it correct that in no circumstances does any imaginary plane extending up from the midcourt line ever have anything to do with anything related to bball rules?

And finally, if you watch closely in the replay, the Louisville player clearly drags his pivot foot causing him to travel prior to releasing the pass. That could also have been what some people were reacting to.

I'll post the video of this play as viewed from behind in just a few minutes.

[bob jenkins]

I didn't watch it, but:
1) As described, it was legal
2) If he picked up the ball first and then stepped into the BC, it would have been illegal
3) Once the ball was in the FC, then stepping into the BC would be illegal
4) The 10-second count ends when the ball achieves FC status
5) There's no imaginary plane

Same rule in HS and NCAAW.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by bfr

And is it correct that in no circumstances does any imaginary plane extending up from the midcourt line ever have anything to do with anything related to bball rules?

I have a vague recollection the plane might be used on the count in the NBA, but I'm too lazy to check . . .

[APG]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h19KcTGtMY

[Camron Rust]

Great no call. Perfect example of the 3 point for a dribbled rule.

[JRutledge]

As I said on the FB page, it was an easy call. Fans have no idea what the rules are, so I do not know why we would be surprised if fans go nuts over this rule. This is an easy no call that would not even bring a second thought to a knowledgeable official.

Peace

[BDevil15]

It's funny that a D1 coach reacted that way as well. Great example of having the ball in back court with feet in front court which is hard to explain to kids sometimes.

[APG]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I have a vague recollection the plane might be used on the count in the NBA, but I'm too lazy to check . . .

The midcourt plane is only a factor if the ball crosses when not in player control. This play would be adjudicated the same way under NFHS, NCAA, and NBA rule sets.