Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Will Love This ...

[LRZ]

In 6-4-3 (which deals with alternating possession, not jump balls), there is a toss, a touch by at least one jumper, and a subsequent action. Not so in situation 1. Let's say A1 and B1 are the jumpers, but A2 and B2 simultaneously touch the ball going out of bounds (the subsequent action). The note says A2 and B2 would jump.

But situation 1 involves a different set of facts. R tosses the ball, neither jumper touches it, and it falls to the floor. What is the "subsequent"--"following"--action? There is none, so this note language does not apply. "The subsequent action was A1 and B1 failing to touch the tossed ball, so they must, by rule, be the two players involved in the second jump ball." This is a distorted, erroneous reading of the word "subsequent."

"Because it [the jump ball] did not legally end, he [A1] still remains a jumper."
"A2 cannot replace A1 because the jump ball must be attempted again."

We've already established that 3-3-2 does not prohibit the switch. What rule or case says that another player already on the floor cannot replace--not sub for, but replace--the original jumper? Citation, please?

As for who or what does the designating, the rule and case books are silent on this. In truth, no one designates the jumpers; they "self-designate." The horn sounds, ten players come onto the floor, two enter the center circle, the R tosses the ball, and away we go.

If you are going to bar something, you need a relevant rule or case, or a less-convoluted (and more germane) analysis. Arcane, out-of-context readings are pedantry, and can result in OOO.