Here's a puzzler

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Here's the problem: Causing the ball to have backcourt status is not a violation. .

Say what???

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Here's the problem: Causing the ball to have backcourt status is not a violation.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Say what???

I said: Causing the ball to have backcourt status, in and of itself, is not a violation. A1 throws the ball into the backcourt. The ball now has backcourt status, but this is not a violation until touched by another A player. In the op, when A3 touched the ball, he caused it to have backcourt status. By rule, this is not a violation since it was not touched last in the frontcourt by team A. The rule specifies that "last to touch, first to touch" is a violation. The interpretation in question directly contradicts the rule. Each of us must decide for himself which carries more weight, the rule or the interp. I have decided.