Quote:
Originally Posted by APG
The case book play specifically states the ball was hit back into the backcourt before the A player retrieved the ball. It does so because the ball the ball gained a frontcourt status from the B deflection and doesn't gain a backcourt status until the ball is touched by something in the backcourt (which it didn't state) or it touches the floor (including the midcourt line) in the backcourt. The interpretation already states that an A player would have to wait for the ball to hit in the backcourt before they could be the first to touch.
|
APG: What is the reference for this interpretation that states that team A player would have to wait for the ball to hit in the backcourt? Are you referring to something other than NFHS books? I'm not arguing, just interested.
Before I have to explain this one to a coach, I want to be able to quote chapter/verse. I was buying the party line until I couldn't find it in the casebook. I like the A-A-A analogy: If team A had team control in frontcourt, team A last touched the ball in the frontcour, and team A is first to touch in backcourt, then violation. If any one of those 3 As is a Bs, no violation. However, if there is a casebook play that contradicts this, please share.
I'm specifically referencing NFHS 12-13 books but would also like to know the reference if in another publication.