Fri Jul 20, 2018, 01:23am
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
The interpretation in question was started with a throw-in. This play is not a throw-in. This is clearly a dumb change just for something they could have simply just changed with the wording of the interpretation.
Peace
|
There is no mention of a throwin in the interpretation in question...
Quote:
SITUATION 7: SITUATION 7: A1, in the team’s frontcourt, passes towards A2, also in the team’s frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team A’s backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team A’s frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team A’s backcourt, but never having touched in Team A’s backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team A’s backcourt.
RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1, 4-4-3, 9-9-1)
|
|
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode
