Quote:
Originally Posted by Stillblind
Mark, I can't disagree with DVR, but I saw it as I described. So for sake of argument lets go with my scenario. I believe it was exactly like the 2 or 3 year old NFHS Interpretation. K-State deflected toward the back court. The ball was in the air over the back court, but that still equals front court status. Once Xavier touced the ball, Xavier caused it to go backcourt. Had the ball bounced first in the BC then I say play on.
|
If it was exactly like the interpretation, it was not a violation. The interpretation was/is bogus.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.
Lonesome Dove
|
Fri Mar 26, 2010, 09:10am
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode
