View Single Post
  #57 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 15, 2010, 11:52am
M&M Guy M&M Guy is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
The "caused to go OOB" rule has a specific statement that A3 casues the ball to go OOB in this situation. Without this statement, then the general "the last person to touch before it went OOB" rule would apply. And, the BC rule has only the general statement, not the specific exception.
I understand the OOB rule has that exception specifically written in, while the backcourt rule and interp doesn't.

I'm not trying to justify the interp by any specific rule; I'm only trying to get into the minds of the committee, and how they got to that specific interp. That's the only way I can think of is to compare it to the ball and player status of that OOB play.

I'm still not sure the interp is correct, but at least (in my mind) it's not as far-fetched as it initially appeared. Maybe they need to adjust some wording in the backcourt rule to make this interp make more sense?
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote