View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2018, 11:30am
JRutledge JRutledge is offline
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Sorry, but the interpretation is the same at the NFHS and NCAA levels. The status of R is out of bounds and therefore a live ball touched (or was touched by) an out of bounds player, making it out of bounds untouched by an inbounds R player.

R has to have inbounds status for the ball to be considered touched by R inbounds.

I'm using Redding as an example only.
But that is not the example given in the play you referenced. I am not arguing that the interpretation of a ball in flight goes on the out of bounds side and R reaches for it it would be a foul on K. I agree that is the case, but that is not this play we are discussing now. This play involves the only thing that makes the ball go out of bounds is the actions by R. If R leaves the ball alone we have a live ball that anyone can go after. We have a live ball that K can take possession of if they get to it. I need another reference to be sure and that is what I am looking for. That is the case I could be out of bounds as R (however I got there) and "punch" the ball completely inbounds and K has fouled because I am completely out of bounds. I am not convinced that is the ruling based on other rulings I have seen over the years.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote