Backcourt?

[Rob1968]

I recognize that causing the ball to go into backcourt is not the violation. As discussed in previous threads, in the OP, if the ball had touched the floor in the backcourt, before A1 touched it, then the covering official would consider that
B1 had caused the ball to be in A's backcourt. And a subsequent touch by A1 would not result in a violation.
It seems to me that both the location status of A1 and the location status of the ball are taken into consideration in the Fed's interpretation. For example, if A1 jumps from A's frontcourt, and while in the air, over A's backcourt, were to touch the ball before it touches A's backcourt, there would be no violation if A1 batted or threw the ball back to A's frontcourt. This would be similar to a player leaping in the air to save a ball which is headed OOB.
I'm just trying to understand the interpretation by the Fed, and their apparent attempt to maintain - from their viewpoint - consistency in such situations.