9-9-2?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Rule 9-9-2: "While in player and team control in its backcourt, a player shall not cause the ball to go from backcourt to frontcourt and return to backcourt, without the ball touching a player in the frontcourt, such that he/she or a teammate is the first to touch it in the backcourt."

I've been trying to get my head around possible situations prohibited by this rule. The casebook has none to clarify. Other than "the backcourt player's pass hitting the leg of an official in the frontcourt then going back..." (previous thread's sitch), can you suggest any other possible situation?

Okay, having once again studied all previous threads on this topic, would this be a correct statement?:

"Since 9-9-1 was revised in order to accomodate the new rule stipulating team control during a throw-in ("The change primarily affects how foul penalties will be administered"), the Casebook situation 9.9.1.C.a trumps the unfortunate phraseology of the new 9-9-1 when, say, backcourt A1's pass touches frontcourt A2 (no player control) and goes back to backcourt where A1 resumes control; this a backcourt violation."

Is that a correct statement for that sort of backcourt-to-frontcourt-to-backcourt situation?

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Okay, having once again studied all previous threads on this topic, would this be a correct statement?:

"Since 9-9-1 was revised in order to accomodate the new rule stipulating team control during a throw-in ("The change primarily affects how foul penalties will be administered"), the Casebook situation 9.9.1.C.a trumps the unfortunate phraseology of the new 9-9-1 when, say, backcourt A1's pass touches frontcourt A2 (no player control) and goes back to backcourt where A1 resumes control; this a backcourt violation."

Is that a correct statement for that sort of backcourt-to-frontcourt-to-backcourt situation?

9.9.1C in the 2010-2011 case book reads, "the ball was in control of Team A." in the 2011-2012 case book it reads "the ball was in control of A1 and Team A."

I don't know what to make of that. If they mean the ball was but no longer is in control of A1, then the ball could not have been in player and team control in the frontcourt. If they mean the ball was and still is in control of A1 during the pass, . . . I'm going to be really confused.

The use of the word "While" in 9-9-2 makes that whole rule seem impossible.

Right now, I am going with Freddy's assessment that case book trumps poorly written rule book.

My association has been very slow to discuss this. I hope we get it figured out before season starts.