Back Court vs. Front Court.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

Right last to touch in f/c & first to touch in the b/c is the violation. So again, we know who deflected toward the b/c but when when did the ball really gain b/c status? And who caused that?

I understand your position, but it works for me & until the guys I work for say otherwise...

What our "employers" say is really irrelevant to the discussion of whether it "should" be a violation.
The rule says team A must be the last to touch "before" the ball gains BC status and the first to touch the ball "after" it has gained BC status.
Events:
A: Team A is last to touch
B: Ball gains BC status
C: Team A is first to touch

How is it possible for a single act (A3 touching the ball) to occur both "before" and "after" any single event?

[Adam]

Sitch:
A1, in the BC, pass the ball towards A2 along the division line.
B3, standing completely in the FC reaches and tips the pass.
A2, standing in the BC, grabs the ball before it touches the floor in the BC.

The logic of the ruling leads to the conclusion that a violation should be called.
The logic of the rule, however, does not.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

How is it possible for a single act to occur both "before" and "after" any single event?

I'm sure that the NFHS took into consideration a possible warp in the space time continuum. After that they all got together and performed brain surgery, followed by a quick discovery involving some type of rocket science.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

I think its a simultaneous act, as in an offensive rebound/tip in. Call it Happy Hour, 2 for 1s!

Again, I understand where you guys are coming from.

As long as I have Sitch 10 to back me up... ya know?

It's a single act that somehow, according to 10, has a separate event happen in between it.

Personally, I'd rather let play continue anyway, and as long as I have the rule to back me up... ya know?

[tref]

True! Perhaps I'll re-think my position on this before this season kicks off -errrr- tips off.