Don't think too deeply about what you think I believe. My thoughts on why this is a no call, for me personally, is not as simple as you described.

There are some plays where a call, even if correct, can have a much more negative effect on the game then a no-call. I don't think there are many but there are some. I think this is one of those plays as it is EXACTLY described. Keep in mind, this is the first time I ever gave this play any thought and if I encounter this situation and it plays out different from what I have in my mind now, I will reverse my position.

For which team exactly and why are you making this decision? As an impartial arbiter of the game the "effect" of one's calls shouldn't have any impact on the job at hand.

"game management" has it's place, however enforcing the rules > "game management".

No...it is not still considered part of the backcourt. The 10 second count that started when it touched the backcourt would now stop because the ball now has frontcourt status.

The violation is that team A is not allowed to be the next to touch a ball that had been in the backcourt previously, even if it is now in the frontcourt, if they were the last to touch it before it returned to the backcourt.

Where the ball is when it is touched doesn't have anything to do with the rule.

So are you saying this violation is something other than a "backcourt" or "over and back" violation?

I have had an official tell me to call 5 fouls as fast as I can on problem players to get them out of the game so the kid does not ruin the game. I disagree with that. I have had an official tell me to rule a block/charge based on the score spread (team is down 30, they will get the call). I disagree with that. I have had officials tell me to hold my whistle on a foul 80 feet from the basket. I kind of agree with this depending on the outcome of the contact.
These officials are "state tournament" level officials. I guess I am damned if I do and damned if I don't.

I will continue to work hard on every play and put myself in the best position possible to make the correct decision. I will continue to give it 100% when I am on the court no matter the level. If I can do these things, no one will care if I pass on the call described in the original post.

The only one I agree with is a bang/bang block/charge in a blowout. The team ahead will be the "offender" every time.

Being a "state" official doesn't mean they are the most qualified unfortunately....When in Rome

No. It is a backcourt violation...but the violation is not for touching the ball in the backcourt. It is for being the first to touch a ball that returned to the backcourt regardless of whether it remained in the backcourt.

You might get away with it, but that does not make it right. Are you also going to pass on a similar save that bounces on the sideline instead? Why or why not?

If you are savvy enough to make this no-call, you should be savvy enough to make a "no-post" on this thread.

Posting that "I am not going to enforce a rule just because" will always invoke a negative response on this board.

Correct, because the ball, for this specific purpose, is not considered part of the frontcourt. Otherwise they just make it very confusing. Similar to granting Team Control during inbounds for cases of fouls only, even though technically TC doesn't yet exist.

I would not pass on an OOB call where the ball hits the line. There is nothing else to take into consideration when the ball strikes the line. A backcourt violation comes with caveats that don't exists with the OOB violation and you know it.

I see your point and it is well taken.

Thanks. THat's helpful.

It reminds me of some posts here a long time ago to the effect of: For a BC violation to happen, it's not necessary that A touch the ball in the FC or that A touch the ball in the BC. Only that the ball reach the FC, and the BC an A is the last to touch before and first to touch after.

Another reason to call this (and not ignore the rule) is that if you don't call it, you are putting your partner(s) in a tough position. If I'm the C on a play like this, there is a chance that I see the ball bounce in the BC. If I was 100% that the ball hit the BC, I'm coming to get this violation from the C if the T misses it or doesn't know the rule.

This isn't a judgement call/trust your partner call -- it's an obvious (although unusual) violation and I can't defend passing just because it's the Trail's line to call.

For those who are arguing not to call this, what would you do if your partner came and got it?

Still doesn't matter, but OK. Do you ignore it when A1 (in the FC) throws a bounce pass across the court to A2 (also in the FC) such that it bounces on the division line?

In the end, you really have no rational argument for not calling this. If you want to write the rules, get on the rules committee. Otherwise, being a renegade only makes it hard for everyone.