Tricky b/c situation

[Nevadaref]

Yes, I meant A2. Thanks. I went back and corrected that.

My answers are:
1. Backcourt violation
2. No violation (no team control when the ball had fc status) Strangely, there shouldn't even be a 10-second count on this play until A2 catches up to the ball and starts dribbling it!
3. Backcourt violation


I noticed that my answer to #1 differs from the others who have posted so far. Therefore, I'll give a brief summary of my reasoning.

The ruling depends upon whether the ball even gained frontcourt status. I believe that it clearly did. Why? An interrupted dribble is not the same as a dribble. During an interrupted dribble there is no player control.
I agree that A2 started a dribble, but when the ball deflected off his knee and bounced away it became an interuppted dribble. When the ball bounced on the floor in the frontcourt without an player in control, only team control existed at this time, it gained frontcourt status. Since A2's feet were in the backcourt when he first touches the ball again, the status of the ball changes to backcourt. That's a violation.

In short, the three points concept doesn't protect A2 here because this was not a dribble it was an interrupted dribble.

I came up with part 3 as a litmus test of this concept. I believe that it doesn't matter whether the same player is the first to get there or a teammate. It's still a violation because there's no denying that the ball did in fact gain frontcourt status.