• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Michigan - Michigan state backcourt call

I can see the control argument.

However, anyone who says he caught that ball is either blind or just trolling, or I guess you think if someone tosses you their keys and thy hit your hands and drop to the ground you technically "caught" them.

Kinda funny because this happened in my men's league game a couple days ago. The refs are high school refs, pretty decent, and the other team threw the ball in, it deflected off their point guard's hands and fell into the back court. As soon as he went to retrieve it they called a backcourt violation. It was completely the wrong call and he almost t'd them up for arguing. Funny.
 
DCDeac said:
I can see the control argument.

However, anyone who says he caught that ball is either blind or just trolling, or I guess you think if someone tosses you their keys and thy hit your hands and drop to the ground you technically "caught" them.

Kinda funny because this happened in my men's league game a couple days ago. The refs are high school refs, pretty decent, and the other team threw the ball in, it deflected off their point guard's hands and fell into the back court. As soon as he went to retrieve it they called a backcourt violation. It was completely the wrong call and he almost t'd them up for arguing. Funny.
Click to expand...
Not unless I've made a "football move."
 
Big Ten backs Spartans backcourt*call
January, 18, 2012
JAN 18
3:50
PM ET
EmailPrintComments
13
By Myron Medcalf
During Michigan’s 60-59 win over Michigan State Monday night, Keith Appling fumbled an in-bounds pass from Austin Thornton with 1:50 to play in the game.

Then, he dribbled the ball off his foot and it rolled into the backcourt. He was whistled for a backcourt violation.

Tom Izzo was livid. And it seemed as if frustration was justified because Appling didn’t appear to have control of the ball (at first glance).

Rule 4, Section 3, Article 6 of the NCAA rulebook says, “After the throw-in ends, an inbounds player in the front court, who is not in control of the ball, may cause the ball to go into the back court.”

The play and subsequent verdict were similar to a situation that occurred toward the end of Minnesota’s 58-55 win over Virginia Tech during the Big Ten/ACC Challenge. Robert Brown bobbled an in-bounds pass that crossed halfcourt during that game, too. He was also whistled for a backcourt violation, but the Big Ten disciplined the official who made that crucial call (Virginia Tech was down 56-55 with 9.9 seconds to play) because Brown never had possession of the ball.

In a statement to ESPN.com Wednesday, however, Big Ten officials said the two plays were different because an official in the Michigan-Michigan State game had ruled that Appling had established control before he crossed into the backcourt. The league reviewed the call and supports the official’s decision.

“The play you reference in the Michigan-Michigan State game and the play you reference in the Minnesota-Virginia Tech game are two different situations,” said Big Ten spokesperson Valerie Todryk Krebs. “In the Minnesota-Virginia Tech game, there was never a frontcourt possession. However, in the Michigan-Michigan State game, the official ruled that there was possession in the frontcourt (Appling dribbling the ball off his foot from the frontcourt into the backcourt), which is a judgment call. The conference reviewed and supports the call.”
 
Turfg said:
Big Ten backs Spartans backcourt*call
January, 18, 2012
JAN 18
3:50
PM ET
EmailPrintComments
13
By Myron Medcalf
During Michigan’s 60-59 win over Michigan State Monday night, Keith Appling fumbled an in-bounds pass from Austin Thornton with 1:50 to play in the game.

Then, he dribbled the ball off his foot and it rolled into the backcourt. He was whistled for a backcourt violation.

Tom Izzo was livid. And it seemed as if frustration was justified because Appling didn’t appear to have control of the ball (at first glance).

Rule 4, Section 3, Article 6 of the NCAA rulebook says, “After the throw-in ends, an inbounds player in the front court, who is not in control of the ball, may cause the ball to go into the back court.”

The play and subsequent verdict were similar to a situation that occurred toward the end of Minnesota’s 58-55 win over Virginia Tech during the Big Ten/ACC Challenge. Robert Brown bobbled an in-bounds pass that crossed halfcourt during that game, too. He was also whistled for a backcourt violation, but the Big Ten disciplined the official who made that crucial call (Virginia Tech was down 56-55 with 9.9 seconds to play) because Brown never had possession of the ball.

In a statement to ESPN.com Wednesday, however, Big Ten officials said the two plays were different because an official in the Michigan-Michigan State game had ruled that Appling had established control before he crossed into the backcourt. The league reviewed the call and supports the official’s decision.

“The play you reference in the Michigan-Michigan State game and the play you reference in the Minnesota-Virginia Tech game are two different situations,” said Big Ten spokesperson Valerie Todryk Krebs. “In the Minnesota-Virginia Tech game, there was never a frontcourt possession. However, in the Michigan-Michigan State game, the official ruled that there was possession in the frontcourt (Appling dribbling the ball off his foot from the frontcourt into the backcourt), which is a judgment call. The conference reviewed and supports the call.”
Click to expand...

And the conference is right, imo. I would call that one a backcourt violation every time.
 
I think the surprise in the player's reaction to dribbling the ball off his foot shows that he thought he had possession.

I wasn't sure if the rules for possession were that subjective - but apparently they are. Good call.
 
I still think, by rule, that wasn't backcourt, but I would have called it backcourt... If that makes any sense.
 
DCDeac said:
I think the surprise in the player's reaction to dribbling the ball off his foot shows that he thought he had possession.

I wasn't sure if the rules for possession were that subjective - but apparently they are. Good call.
Click to expand...

There are always a lot of subjective calls out there. What fans & coaches might think is a travel is a lot of times a fumble. There are rules about being able to fumble the ball, get control and dribble, fumble it again and be able to go grab it. Nothing illegal at all about that but it looks weird and so everybody wants it called.

How many times do you see a kid dribble then fumble the ball and not go pick it up? You see them kinda guard the defense off the ball in hopes that his teammate will come get it. As an official you always want to yell out "go pick it up" but you can't.

You also see a kid try to catch an inbounds pass near mid-court, again fumble it without ever gaining possession and the ball will bounce in the backcourt. He won't go touch the ball and ultimately lets the defense grab it & usually go for a layup
 
Turfg said:
I still think, by rule, that wasn't backcourt, but I would have called it backcourt... If that makes any sense.
Click to expand...

I would say that 999/1000 times you would see that called a backcourt

But that said, there are a lot of subjective calls and even made harder by just the angle of the official that sees it or calls it.

I might call a charge in the first half, we get together at halftime or whenever & one of the partners said he would have had it a block because the defender leaned to create contact. Block/charges are made much easier if the primary official is watching the defense...that way he can see the feet and body and know if the defender got in position before the offense left his feet. The feet do NOT have to be set as the announcers always say. Just in legal guarding position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top