Question to ponder

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Ok, how about this.
A1 dribbling in the BC. The ball gets away from him (hits his toe) and bounces towards the sideline, in the FC. He goes towards the sideline to retrieve it, but never leaves the BC. He then reaches across the division line and continues his dribble.

My first thought is it is missing the last to touch part of a backcourt violation. But this brings us back to the interp that we all hate. I guess A1 commits both actions (last to touch and first to touch) simultaneously. So my current thought is that this is a violation based on the interp.

I've had time to ponder some more. Simple backcourt violation. 9-9-2.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Ok, how about this.
A1 dribbling in the BC. The ball gets away from him (hits his toe) and bounces towards the sideline, in the FC. He goes towards the sideline to retrieve it, but never leaves the BC. He then reaches across the division line and continues his dribble.

Originally Posted by Scratch85

My first thought is it is missing the last to touch part of a backcourt violation. But this brings us back to the interp that we all hate. I guess A1 commits both actions (last to touch and first to touch) simultaneously. So my current thought is that this is a violation based on the interp.

I've had time to ponder some more. Simple backcourt violation. 9-9-2.

While I agree with your result, your reasoning in red is not correct.

The ball gained FC status when it bounced in the FC.

The ball returned to the BC when A1 picked it up while standing in the BC.

A1's last to touch before the ball returned to the BC occurred when it bounced off of A1's toe....not when A1 picked up the ball.

A1, having picked it up in the backcourt, was then the first to touched it after it gained BC status.


If instead, the ball had bounced off of B1's toe and everything else was the same, it would be legal.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If instead, the ball had bounced off of B1's toe and everything else was the same, it would be legal.

It would?

The ball bounces off of B1's toe.

The ball gained FC status when it bounced in the FC.

The ball returned to the BC when A1 picked it up while standing in the BC.

A1, having picked it up in the backcourt, was then the first to touched it after it gained BC status.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

It would?

The ball bounces off of B1's toe.

The ball gained FC status when it bounced in the FC.

The ball returned to the BC when A1 picked it up while standing in the BC.

A1, having picked it up in the backcourt, was then the first to touched it after it gained BC status.

But B1 was the last to touch the ball BEFORE it returned to the BC....thus no violation.