Bc?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Moosie74

We discussed this for quite awhile the other night. The group answer was yes, the state interpreter says yes, Peter Webb says yes, the committee is wrong. Expect it to be clarified soon.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

"The committee?" As in the rule committee? The IAABO committee?

Let me pose a situation:

A1 dribbling near the division line, standing in the back court. B1 standing completely in the front court guarding A1.
B1 slaps the ball out of A1's control (ball now has FC status) into the BC where A2 catches it (it never bounced in the BC prior to A2's catch).

Is this a BC violation?

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Adam

"The committee?" As in the rule committee? The IAABO committee?

Let me pose a situation:

A1 dribbling near the division line, standing in the back court. B1 standing completely in the front court guarding A1.
B1 slaps the ball out of A1's control (ball now has FC status and is still in control of Team A) into the BC where A2 catches it (it never bounced in the BC prior to A2's catch).

Is this a BC violation?

And you could add this so newer officials are aware.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

"The committee?" As in the rule committee? The IAABO committee?

Let me pose a situation:

A1 dribbling near the division line, standing in the back court. B1 standing completely in the front court guarding A1.
B1 slaps the ball out of A1's control (ball now has FC status) into the BC where A2 catches it (it never bounced in the BC prior to A2's catch).

Is this a BC violation?

A2 wouldn't even have to catch the ball. B1 would only need to bat the ball such that it struck A1 or A2 for a violation to occur, if that interpretation were valid. That would be nonsense.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

A2 wouldn't even have to catch the ball. B1 would only need to bat the ball such that it struck A1 or A2 for a violation to occur, if that interpretation were valid. That would be nonsense.

Good point.