|
I posted this not because I have seen it, but it is an interesting case play.
Let's layer this play and break it down:
What is the status of the ball when A-1 passes? Answer: frontcourt
What is the status of the ball when B-1 deflects the ball? Answer: frontcourt
What is the status of the ball when the deflected ball bounces in the frontcourt? Answer: frontcourt
The ball does not have backcourt status until when? Answer: The ball must either touch the floor in the backcourt or be touched by a player or ref with backcourt status or touch the backboard in the backcourt.
When does the ball have backcourt status? Answer: When it was touched by A3.
If the ball doesn't have backcourt status until it is touched by A3, then A3 caused the backcourt status.
If A3 allowed the ball to first touch the floor before catching the ball, then it would be B1 that caused the ball to have backcourt status. Then it would be legal for A3 to touch the ball in the backcourt because A3 did not cause the ball to have backcourt status.
Essentially A3 caused the ball to have backcourt status. Therefore it is a backcourt violation on A3.
If A3 had been standing out of bounds then we would deem that A3 caused the ball to go out of bounds and not B1.
So, if we layer this play and look at the status of the ball and who caused the status of the ball then we must rule this play as a backcourt violation.
However, I agree also that I doubt anyone would give a no-call a second thought.
|