Is this the one?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Yep, I left out the remainder of 7-2-1, which goes on to say "...unless the ball touches a player who is OOB prior to touching something OOB other than a player". So, to me, this is an exception that was added to prevent a loophole caused by simply following ball and player location rules, and the first part of 7-2-1. So what does this exception effectively do? It makes the player who is standing OOB be "...the last player inbounds to touch or be touched by it...", and also caused the ball to be OOB due to their location.

Maybe it was that same "logic" that caused the player in the interp to be the last to touch in the frontcourt, and caused the ball to be in the backcourt due to their location. (Again, for the record, I don't agree; I'm just trying to come up with a sort of logic to possibly explain the interp.)

If they wanted to use that logic, they should have added the similar wording to the backcourt ruling. Without it, the logic is different, the rule is different and the ruling should be different.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If they wanted to use that logic, they should have added the similar wording to the backcourt ruling. Without it, the logic is different, the rule is different and the ruling should be different.

I agree.