Just for fun - we know this could never happen, uh, don't we? - imagine that:

Thrower-in A1 begins an inbounds pass but does not release the ball. In the process, A1 puts the ball, still in both hands, through the plane to the inbounds side. Defender B1 puts a hand on the ball to deny the pass, but does not tie it up sufficiently to justify a held ball whistle. B1 keeps the hand on the ball as A1 withdraws the ball across the plane.

Technical foul on B1 for contacting the ball on the out-of-bounds- side of the plane? Oh, the enticement of it all.

Held ball, if anything.

I dunno. I guess you could make a case for a T if B1 still had his hand on the ball after A1 drew it back so it was now OOB. However, if that was the situation, it's more than likely B1 had his hand on the ball while it was IB long enough for a jump call. He doesn't have to "tie it up", just have his hand solidly on it.

I wouldn't go with a T. I'd either go with held ball or stay with the 5 second count (ball still has not been released). You have to look at intent. In one case, the defender is trying to dislodge the ball illegally (T) and in the other case the defender is trying to tie up the ball (legal). This sounds like the defender was merely trying the latter.

If it happened fast enough and appeared that A1 may have released the ball for a milasecond I may even have out of bounds on A, giving B ball. The idea being that it was released and tapped (Albeit really quickly lol) back to A1.

I've got a held ball.

I believe this is what I've got too.

Held ball is the best call. It's the right call. It's going to be the easiest sell.

how come no OOB call of some sort?

Read the original posting. It wasn't a held ball, so you can't whistle it. I would say OOB on both players since B touched it while it was in-bounds. Means go to the possession arrow. Now, what's going to happen is the coaches will say it wasn't a held ball, means you gotta sell the fact that B was in contact with a ball OOB. Have fun with that one!

Unless B's foot is out of bounds, the only OOB call you can make gives the ball to A. Think of another scenario. A1 with the ball, B1 standing with a foot out of bounds reaches over and grabs it. OOB off B, not both. This is the same thing.
A has to release it before you can call him for being OOB with the ball. Unless A has released the ball, and this means unless you're sure the ball was released (don't use this as a cop-out call), you can't call this play OOB.
If A1 puts the ball over the plane, and B1 gets his hand on it and keeps it there while A1 pulls it back in, I've got a held ball.
I know what the post said, and I disagree. My threshold for a held ball may be lower here than in most other plays, but I can't see calling it anything else. Nothing else makes sense by rule or common sense.

It can't be OOB on both players because the only thing touching OOB is A1.;)

I don't know about it being the easiest sell. For fellow officials, yes. For coaches, players and fans I don't think so. They don't know the rules well enough.

True enough, but it's going to be easier than the alternatives. I can't sell OOB off both, because it didn't happen. I'd have a harder time selling a T for two reasons; first the kid grabbed it when he was allowed to and second the penalty is so much more severe that it's going to draw a lot more argument than a held ball whistle. This is a play that may prompt me to explain to the coaches what I saw.
So, while it may not be an easy sell. I think it would be the easiest sell of the alternatives.

Just contacted the state office (Nebraska) about this one, to see what their interpretation would be. They advised me if this were to happen in a game, just to blow it dead and issue a warning for reaching through the plane since B1 should have taken her hand off when it went back through the plane. The coordinator of officials said this sounded like a had to be there play to really make a strong call.