[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Again with all respect, this is simply not true. Yes, the rule serves to define frontcourt/backcourt status; but not only that. Article 4 makes no reference at all to inbounds/out of bounds, or frontcourt/backcourt; neither does Article 3, although I can see how you might try to interpret it as referring only to Articles 1 and 2.

Rule 4-4 is not solely about inbounds/out of bounds. It defines the ball's location on the court, period. If an official chooses to ignore that location when administering the POI, that's up to him or her. But s/he will be wrong.

Scrapper:

With all due respect, the history of the rule is very important. Article 3 of R4-S4 has, for at least 45 years (that covers my playing days as well as my entire officiating career), defined the court status of the ball. I repeat that when Article 3 was written the concept of Point-of-Interruption did not exist. With the advent of Point-of-Interruption, the word "location" may not be the best word to be used in Article 3, but until Article 3 is revised, it means what it has meant for over 45 years, court status of the ball.

MTD, Sr.