You make the call

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

Isn't there a something somewhere in the book that says that whatever status a player has, when that player is in contact with the ball, or even dribbling the ball, the ball has the same status?

No, that is not accurate. The specifics of the rule differ for player status and ball status between inbounds/OOB and frontcourt/backcourt. You can't argue this stuff by analogy in these cases.

RULE 4, SECTION 4 BALL LOCATION, AT DISPOSAL
ART. 1 . . . A ball which is in contact with a player or with the court is in the backcourt if either the ball or the player (either player if the ball is touching more than one) is touching the backcourt.
ART. 2 . . . A ball which is in contact with a player or with the court is in the frontcourt if neither the ball nor the player is touching the backcourt.

RULE 4, SECTION 35 PLAYER LOCATION
ART. 1 . . . The location of a player or nonplayer is determined by where the player is touching the floor as far as being:
a. Inbounds or out of bounds.
b. In the frontcourt or backcourt.
c. Outside (behind/beyond) or inside the three-point field-goal line.
ART. 2 . . . When a player is touching the backcourt, out of bounds or the three-point line, the player is located in backcourt, out of bounds,or inside the three-point line, respectively.


Rule 7 Out of Bounds and the Throw-in
SECTION 1 OUT-OF-BOUNDS — PLAYER, BALL
ART. 1 . . . A player is out of bounds when he/she touches the floor, or any object other than a player, on or outside a boundary. For location of a player in the air, see 4-35.
ART. 2 . . . The ball is out of bounds when it touches or is touched by:
a. A player who is out of bounds.
b. Any other person, the floor, or any object on or outside a boundary.
c. The supports or back of the backboard.
d. The ceiling, overhead equipment or supports.
NOTE: When the rectangular backboard is used, the ball is out of bounds if it passes over the backboard.


So if a player in standing in the backcourt was holding the ball and bent over and touched the ball to the floor in the frontcourt without releasing it, the ball would not gain frontcourt status. However if a player standing inbounds did this same action with one of the OOB boundary lines, then the ball would gain OOB status. (This exact play is depicted in the Simplified & Illustrated 9-9-1. When the player stands back up, the ruling is NO backcourt violation.)

It's just different and the situations don't always follow the same logic, so arguing in that manner is not productive.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

OK, I found something in Rule 7, and when I returned to post, I see that you have already cited the rule, so I will cut and highlight what's relevant and we can discuss.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Rule 7 Out of Bounds and the Throw-in
SECTION 1 OUT-OF-BOUNDS — PLAYER, BALL
ART. 1 . . . A player is out of bounds when he/she touches the floor, or any object other than a player, on or outside a boundary. For location of a player in the air, see 4-35.
ART. 2 . . . The ball is out of bounds when it touches or is touched by:
a. A player who is out of bounds.
b. Any other person, the floor, or any object on or outside a boundary.
c. The supports or back of the backboard.
d. The ceiling, overhead equipment or supports.
NOTE: When the rectangular backboard is used, the ball is out of bounds if it passes over the backboard.

SO, based on the highlighted sections above, it would seem to me that the ball is still out of bounds because it is still being touched by a player who is out of bounds.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

SO, based on the highlighted sections above, it would seem to me that the ball is still out of bounds because it is still being touched by a player who is out of bounds.

No one is saying that the ball doesn't still have OOB status or the player for that matter. The action can still be a violation. See the example in which the player steps inbounds with one foot. Case book play 9.2.5--that player is still OOB. Therefore, do you think that is legal too?


Now how about responding to what I wrote in post #9. That is the central issue.