New interps Sitch # 10

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

This flies COMPLETELY in the face of the rule. What happened the requirement that team A be the last to touch "before" going into the backcourt? This case completely fails that criteria.

I think they've got a bogus interp here....unless they're changing yet another longstanding rule by "interpretation".

Camron,
I don't care for the ruling either, but what the NFHS is saying is that A2 was the last to touch the ball while it had frontcourt status and is also the first to touch the ball once it gains backcourt status.

Personally, I think that A2 should only be considered to be the first to touch it in the backcourt, not also the last to touch for frontcourt purposes.

New play: A3 in his backcourt throws a pass towards A4 who is standing in the frontcourt. B5 jumps from his backcourt and deflects the pass. The ball remains in the air, never touching the court as it rebounds directly to A3 who catches it while standing in the same location in his backcourt.
According to the new interp, this is a backcourt violation. That doesn't mesh with the intent of the rule or case book play 9.9.1 Sit C.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Camron,
I don't care for the ruling either, but what the NFHS is saying is that A2 was the last to touch the ball while it had frontcourt status and is also the first to touch the ball once it gains backcourt status.

Personally, I think that A2 should only be considered to be the first to touch it in the backcourt, not also the last to touch for frontcourt purposes.

New play: A3 in his backcourt throws a pass towards A4 who is standing in the frontcourt. B5 jumps from his backcourt and deflects the pass. The ball remains in the air, never touching the court as it rebounds directly to A3 who catches it while standing in the same location in his backcourt.
According to the new interp, this is a backcourt violation. That doesn't mesh with the intent of the rule or case book play 9.9.1 Sit C.

I strongly suspect we'll see a correction issued on this one.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I strongly suspect we'll see a correction issued on this one.

I disagree with you there. I do not think for a second that they will change. The typical NF modus operandi is to just sit on the ruling and change it in the future. I would be shocked if they came back with a different ruling.

Peace