[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

The exact order of events is unclear: Was B1 already touching the table when she touched the ball? If so, this would be a throw-in violation on A and the ball goes to B.

SECTION 2 THROW-IN PROVISIONS
A player shall not violate the following provisions governing the throw-in.
The thrower shall not:
ART. 2 . . . Fail to pass the ball directly into the court from out-of-bound so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.

If not, then the ball goes to A at the table.

### Possible retraction of above statement ###

Actually, now that I re-read the rule, I'm confused by the "inbounds our out of bounds" part. It also seems to wreak havoc with the definition of "on the court" that Nevada was quoting. Is this really saying that the conditions of And does it really equate being "inbounds or out of bounds" with being "on the court"?the throw-in are met by touching a player who is out of bounds? Or am I reading it incorrectly?

And now that rampant self-doubt is running amok, I'm going to rephrase my earlier statement as a question: If B1 was OOB by virtue of touching the table when she touched the ball, would that not be the same as A1's inbound pass going OOB untouched? Or is it, instead, an OOB violation on B1?

You have the part in blue above backwards, but you already realized that. Bob J gave you the correct ruling.
Yet you raise a great point about the inconsistent use of the term "on the court" in the Rulesbook. In the definition of guarding 4-23 the words "on the court" are used to specify that a player must be inbounds. These words were also used in this same manner in the "clarifications" that were issued by NFHS committee prior to their inclusion in the Rulesbook. Just to be accurate, I'll point out that I only quoted the definition of guarding and argued by analogy the meaning of the words "on the court." We KNOW what they mean in 4-23 because the NFHS committee has said so. We DON't know what they mean in 5-9-4 or 9-2-2. In fact, there is a clear indication that "on the court" means BOTH inbounds AND out of bounds in 9-2-2. The NFHS needs to fix this. They really need to give us a definition of the playing court and what it means to be "on the court." In the past we have argued that according to Rule 1 the playing court is what is inside the sidelines and endlines. If that is true, then the committee is misusing the phrase in 9-2-2 and should change it.

Nice catch BITS.