“Over the back” - is NOT a foul !

[Crossover2]

All the spectators, team members, coaches, announcers and fans watching on TV yell
“Over the back” if an opposing player gets near their player from behind usually jumping
on a shot or rebound.
If a whistle is blown, what is the signal for “over the back”

 

[southofnorth]

I couldn't find anything in the official rulebook specifically citing "over the back" as cause for a foul. However, I found this:

Section 6, Art. 5: It shall be illegal to extend one’s arms fully or partially, other than vertically, so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the extended arms occurs

So essentially "over the back" might be some combination of this "freedom of movement" and/or a push? The rules can sometimes appear tricky. I also found this:

Section 6, Art. 2: It shall be legal for a defender to accidentally hit the hand of a ball- handler when reaching to block or slap the ball when there is player control with that player’s hand in contact with the ball and when that player is:

1. A dribbler;
2. Attempting a try for field goal; or
3. Holding the ball

Really confused by what this means because it seems to completely negate fouls when trying to block a shot and a player hits an opponent on the hand. Maybe I'm misunderstanding this completely and if that's the case I could use an explanation.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/WBR19_20180906.pdf

 

[Plebe]

It's basically a "push" (i.e., displacement).

"Over the back" is just popular slang but not official verbiage.

 

[CompSci87]

Correct, just like reaching in is not a foul in itself.

In both cases you are likely to commit a foul, say by pushing or holding, but then again you may not.

 

[UcMiami]

You can reach over a player's back, you just cannot make contact with that reach. Ono quite often gets a rebound over the back of a shorter player because of her length and leaping ability. She also quite often gets called for a foul with that maneuver when she makes significant contact with the player's shoulder, head, or back.

But as others say, there is no 'over the back' or 'reach in' or 'hooking' foul - they are all 'contact fouls' whether offensive or defensive. In reality all playing fouls are 'contact' fouls, but some are designated specifically like hand checking and change from time to time - hand checks were specifically identified a few years ago with I think a single 'spacing touch permitted but continuing contact on a player was deemed a foul.

 

[DeeHusky]

My uncle used to always say, “over the back is not a foul, on the back is a foul.”

 

[ClifSpliffy]

I couldn't find anything in the official rulebook specifically citing "over the back" as cause for a foul. However, I found this:

Section 6, Art. 5: It shall be illegal to extend one’s arms fully or partially, other than vertically, so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the extended arms occurs

So essentially "over the back" might be some combination of this "freedom of movement" and/or a push? The rules can sometimes appear tricky. I also found this:

Section 6, Art. 2: It shall be legal for a defender to accidentally hit the hand of a ball- handler when reaching to block or slap the ball when there is player control with that player’s hand in contact with the ball and when that player is:

1. A dribbler;
2. Attempting a try for field goal; or
3. Holding the ball

Really confused by what this means because it seems to completely negate fouls when trying to block a shot and a player hits an opponent on the hand. Maybe I'm misunderstanding this completely and if that's the case I could use an explanation.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/WBR19_20180906.pdf

'hand is part of the ball.'