backcourt question from Rulebox

[joelpoli]

doesn't A1 touching the ball that still has frontcourt status make A1 the "first to touch and the last to touch"?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by joelpoli

doesn't A1 touching the ball that still has frontcourt status make A1 the "first to touch and the last to touch"?

A player can only have one status or the other. When the ball touches the player it instantly gains the status of that player.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by joelpoli

doesn't A1 touching the ball that still has frontcourt status make A1 the "first to touch and the last to touch"?

No, but even if it did the rule says this....

* last to touch BEFORE the ball returns the the backcourt
* first to touch AFTER the ball returns to the backcourt

There is a time at which the ball returns to the backcourt....the instant it touches the floor or player in the backcourt.

So, if the ball, having been deflected by team B, next touches A1 who is in the backcourt, who was the last person to touch it before that point? Team B. No violation.

[so cal lurker]

So, a practical question from a non-re with a kid who plays. In the scenario here, is the end result that some officials are going to call it a BC violation because of the interp and others are going to no-call it because the interp makes not a lick of sense?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

So, a practical question from a non-re with a kid who plays. In the scenario here, is the end result that some officials are going to call it a BC violation because of the interp and others are going to no-call it because the interp makes not a lick of sense?

Yep.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yep.

Why? If there is an interpretation, whether it makes sense or not, covers the play in black or white why should there be variance?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by deecee

Why? If there is an interpretation, whether it makes sense or not, covers the play in black or white why should there be variance?

The interpretation itself is the variance. It varies 180 degrees from the rule. You have to choose to follow one or the other. Most of us choose the rule.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The interpretation itself is the variance. It varies 180 degrees from the rule. You have to choose to follow one or the other. Most of us choose the rule.

I understand that. But it's very clear cut with a very clear application. It may be opposite what the rule says, however it covers 1 specific application of the rule. I don't see what the fuss it. It doesn't have to make sense but it's very clear cut.