Throw In Violation?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Conclude what you want to conclude. I don't have a clue what that stoopid NCAA AR is saying. And I basically could give a damn less what the NCAA AR is saying. IT DOESN'T MATTER! And again(and again and again and.... ), the NCAA AR doesn't mean squat with regards to the original post. It's irrelevant. It's not germane. It's got nothing to do with anything. IT DOESN'T MATTER! That's what people are trying to get through to you, and it doesn't seem to penetrate that ossified material surrounding whatever is inside your head.

You are claiming that the NCAA AR makes the original post into a violation. No one agrees with you. No one! End of story. Cut to black.

Yes, I am claiming that if it took place in an NCAA game, the situation in the OP would be a violation solely due to what is written in A.R. 155.
You say no violation. Why?
Because there is one little, insignificant sentence in the setup of the play? Why do you focus on the thrower stepping inbounds in that description?
So the A.R. isn't a perfect match for the OP, but it is darn close! So close in fact, that it seems to be the best written ruling available on the play from the NCAA. (NFHS has nothing specific. We just have to look at the text of the rules. Of course, if we did that with the NCAA rules, we'd have to conclude that the play is legal.)
Now that is what you won't accept. Instead you either choose to fudge and say that the thrower fumbled the ball, when in fact he passed it, or continue to nitpick on some tiny detail, which is really the part that is irrelevant.

The bottom line is that some moron who as MTD said earlier can't read or correctly apply the NCAA rules, but happens to have a position of power within the organization, wrote a ridiculous ruling which is currently official. So we internet folks will just have to sit back and wait for it to get deleted by someone else who actually has power in the real world.