Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
But as I pointed out, it matches exactly the criteria for the ball gaining out of bounds status. If you're standing out of bounds and you catch the ball, then you caused the ball to be out of bounds.
|
Yes, everyone agrees that this player is the one who caused the ball to be OOB, but just about no one says that this player was the last one to touch the ball while inbounds.
The same should hold true for a player standing in the backcourt. He should cause the ball to be in the backcourt. He shouldn't be considered to also be the last to touch the ball BEFORE it went to the backcourt.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by blindzebra
As Tony and I said way back when A2 simultaneously was the last to touch/ first to touch because the ball still had FC status.
|
The NFHS needs to get rid of the concept of simultaneously doing two things with a single touch. The player needs to be considered to be merely the first to touch the ball in the backcourt, not both the first to do that and the last to touch in the frontcourt. Saying that it is both is just
Besides according to the text of the rule the player has to be "in the frontcourt" when the last touch occurs. He clearly isn't. A player from the opposing team was the last one to meet that requirement.
This is an asinine interpretation.
How can a player be the last to touch the ball BEFORE it went to the backcourt, if his first and only touch is the very one which causes it to be in the backcourt. He certainly didn't do anything with the ball BEFORE then.
I believe that the text of the rule should be rewritten and stated terms of the status of the ball. Something akin to ...a player shall not cause the status of the ball to change from frontcourt to backcourt, if the player or a teammate was .... I'll have to think about this and work on the wording, but it seems that stating it this way would be clearer.
