|
We do tend to re-hash this on a regular basis.
The factor that the ball still has A-team frontcourt status, after B's deflection, while it is in the air, followed by A1 touching it, while A1 is in the A-team backcourt, can follow two divergent logic strains:
The first is that A1's touching simultaneously equates to A1 being the last to touch the ball while it has frontcourt status, and first to touch it in the backcourt, thus causing a team A backcourt violation. The companion statement is that if A1 allows the ball to touch the court, or a B player, in the backcourt, before A1 touches the ball, there is no violation.
The second logic strain is that B1 is the last to touch the ball while it has A-team frontcourt status, thus interrupting the elements that would cause a backcourt violation.
Both logic paths have their supporters, the first being the NF stated understanding, which is not presently in the Case Book.
__________________
To be good at a sport, one must be smart enough to play the game -- and dumb enough to think that it's important . . . 
|