The first time I ever saw this

[M&M Guy]

Ok, I remember this interp and how it was stated. But, since I'm having one of my blonde moments, I was wondering what the logic is behind putting the ball back at the baseline instead at the spot closest to the violation? Isn't this similar to, say, the over-and-back violation? Player A1 loses control in the frontcourt, causing the ball to roll into the backcourt, where no one touches it until A1 is the first to touch it under the basket in their backcourt. The throw-in will be under the basket, because the violation didn't occur until it was touched first by A1. (Not at halfcourt, like many coaches and fans would want.) The same with this throw-in sitch - the ball was inbounds, and the violation didn't occur until it was first touched by A21 near halfcourt, so why wouldn't the throw-in be nearest the spot of the violation?