fan
Years ago
i know the rule has changed recently and both feet and the ball need to be in the front court before passing back.
but is this passing back ?
team A scores.
team B inbounds off the end line with a baseball pass - team B receiver with both feet in front court jumps up and receives pass in the air and then lands with both feet in the back court.
y/n ?
thanks
Car Ramrod
Years ago
While airborne, a player retains the same status relative to the floor as where he was last touching
the floor before jumping into the air.
Violation if he lands in the back court.
FM
Years ago
Violation because your team has control of the ball.
In defence if you jump to intercept the ball you can go from front to back court on the air.
fan
Years ago
i reckon it is fine - because the ball has not touched the floor in the front court.
for example now you can have both feet front court side of the line and dribble the ball in the back court over the line - as long as the ball has not been in the front court yet.
Xx
Years ago
This is a violation.
As stated above if this occurs whilst playing defense and intercepting a pass this is fine. As your team never had control of the ball.
On offense, your team had control of the ball in the backcourt, and the last place your feet touched the floor was the front court but then landed in the backcourt.
This is explained in the rule book but also examples of situations like this one are also in the Fiba rule interpretation document.
Clapped Out Hack
Years ago
Always called back court but that is an interesting point about the ball not entering the front court.
Shit I wish the previous post had popped up before I posted, it might have stopped me looking like a dick head.
In the know
Years ago
Not a violation.
Under the ew rule you must have 2 feet and the ball over the half.
,
Years ago
But if the feet were in front half last legal position ..... isn't the ball as well?
In the know
Years ago
The ball hasnt entered the front court, only the playes feet.
ART. 30 BALL RETURNED TO THE BACKCOURT
Statement 1
While airborne, a player retains the same status relative to the floor as where he was last touching
the floor before jumping into the air. However, when an airborne player jumps from his frontcourt
and gains control of the ball while still airborne, he is the first player on his team to establish team
control.
If his momentum then returns him to his backcourt, he is helpless to avoid not returning also with
the ball to the backcourt. Therefore if an airborne player establishes a new team control, that
player's position relative to the frontcourt/backcourt will not be determined until the player has
returned with both feet to the floor.
As stated because this is not establishing new control it would be deemed a violation.
CL13
Years ago
Could "control" be open to interpretation? Control can be determined by the arrow during play stoppage, but this is different to on court control when game time has commenced. In that case "control" is determined by the first player on court (not the inbounder) to be deemed to have control of the ball. That is the point at which the clock starts. Looking at it that way, the airbourne player is in fact establishing new control and therefore is not in violation of the backcourt rule. This is one of those situations that can be debated forever I think.
If I get called for a moving screen whilst the ball is at the hands of the inbound passer is it not offensive?
Art. 14 Control of the ball
14.1 Definition
14.1.1 Team control starts when a player of that team is in control of a live ball by holding or dribbling it or has a live ball at his disposal.
Art. 10 Status of the ball
10.1 The ball can be either live or dead.
10.2 The ball becomes live when:
• During the jump ball, the ball leaves the hand(s) of the referee on the toss.
• During a free throw, the ball is at the disposal of the free-throw shooter.
• During a throw-in, the ball is at the disposal of the player taking the throw-in.
Team B player has a live ball at his disposal thus control has been established.
Thus this is a violation
CL13
Years ago
Mmm yes anon, you have established "team control" is determined by the inbounder holding a live ball. I do not dispute your point at all, merely highlighting another perspective. Lets face it, you could take this situation and just about any other situation you could think of where a rule needs to be applied, ask a hundred referees what they would call and get a mixed response, but all justifiable because of individual interpretation.
A mixed response just means referees do not know the rules!! The rule itself is there clearly articulated in black and white.
There isnt an element of interpretation in this play. The inbound passer has a live ball at his disposal which establishes control, the receiving player jumps from the front court to the back court. Nothing to interpret, it's simply a violation.
CL13
Years ago
Yep, like I said, I see your point, but all games are officiated by referees, so saying that referees don't know the rules makes no difference to the outcome in a game situation (except maybe with a tech foul on the scoresheet). All rules are always interpreted by the person/people applying them. That's just life.
The question though posed in the topic asked "is this passing backwards..?" The answer by rule is yes.
Jason
Years ago
I don't think it is a violation. If it is a violation, it shouldn't be IMO
You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.
Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.
An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 11:12 pm, Wed 24 Apr 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754
