NFHS Case Book Contradiction?

[pop_ey]

Okay let me see if I have this straight in my thick skull.

4.12.6 SITUATION: During a throw-in by A1 from the end line by A’s basket (b) the throw-in is touched by A2 before it goes across the division line where it is recovered by A3. RULING: There is no a backcourt rule in effect in (b) during a throw-in. The throw-in ends in (b) when A2 legally touches the ball, but the backcourt count does not start until A3 gains control. (9-7, 8)

9.9.1 SITUATION D: Team A is awarded a throw-in near the division line. A1's
throw-in is deflected by B1; A2 jumps from Team A’s frontcourt, catches the ball in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. The throw-in ends when it is legally touched by B1. A2 gains player and team control in the air after having left the floor from Team A’s frontcourt, therefore having frontcourt status. As soon as A2 lands in the backcourt, he/she has committed a backcourt violation. The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball. (9-9-3)
__________________________________________________ _______________
In 4.12.6 the throw in ended and the exception ended when touched by A2. However A3 gained conrol of it in Back Court not in front court. So not a back court since it wasn't in control in the front court.

In 9.9.1 D: Since A2 gains contol of ball while having frontcourt status, and the throw end exception had ended, it is backcourt when A2 lands in back court. Had the ball never been touched before A2 gaining control then it would not had been a backcourt when A2 landed as the exception granted during a throw in had not ended.

Thinking out loud! Think I have it now. Thanks.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by pop_ey

In 4.12.6 the throw in ended and the exception ended when touched by A2. However A3 gained control of it in Back Court not in front court. So not a back court since there was no team control when the ball was touched in the frontcourt it wasn't in control in the front court.

In 9.9.1 D: Since A2 gains control of ball while having frontcourt status, and the throw-in exception had ended, it is backcourt when A2 lands in back court. Had the ball never been touched before A2 gaining control then it would not had been a backcourt when A2 landed as the exception granted during a throw in had not ended.

Thinking out loud! Think I have it now. Thanks.

Correct as amended.