View Single Post
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 30, 2006, 10:27am
Jurassic Referee Jurassic Referee is offline
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
Grrrrrr. Make me open the casebook. . . Grumble, grumble.

It's there just to dispel the myth about being the "first to touch". Being the first to touch the ball is irrelevant to whether a violation has been committed or not, as I already said. In all three situations of that case play, there was no violation for touching the ball after returning inbounds. So the touching is irrelevant to whether a violation was committed or not. The violation in (c) is for dribbling a second time; not for coming back inbounds and recovering the ball.
That's cool. But is that what the original poster was referring to, Carnac? That case play sureashell fits what he posted imo(almost word-for-word). If so, that would make the correct answer to the OP be "neither-legal play".
Reply With Quote