True but in neither one is there PC in the front court which is what the rulebook says is required although their is a casebook play that says it isn't. My point is why not make it one way or the other? Either require player control to be established in the fc or not but rule it that way in both cases.

It is that way.

4 requirements:

1) PC inbounds
2) Ball in FC
3) A last to touch before ball goes to BC
4) A first to touch after ball goes to BC.

Note that 1 and 2 are separate items -- PC in the FC is not required.

Has the rule been recently rewrote? I see these 4 listed on here many times yet the rule says pc in the fc is required. Has the rule been altered to lead to this wording as I know there is casebook play that says it is not required?

The rule is different depending how long you've been officiating :D

But, that is exactly how they have described the case plays in interpretations surrounding the rule.

The rule has indeed been rewritten. Here's the 2010 version of 9-9-1:

A player shall not be the first to touch a ball after it has been in team
control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by
the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

And the 2012 version:

A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in player
and team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or
was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

We should amend the "four requirements" to three:

1. PC in FC
2. A last to touch in FC
3. A first to touch in BC

That won't work because a pass from BC that touches a player in the FC and rebounds to the BC is a violation but there was never PC in the FC.

I agree with you (and always have) that the best thing to do is just reword the defintion of TC foul so that you can have a TC foul without TC, just like you can have a PC foul without PC.

The 3 points is how I read the current rule but the casebook seems to not agree. Is the casebook play old?

Under the current wording of the rule this is not backcourt. However the casebook says it is.

When the NFHS changed the TC rule, they changed this part of the bc rule in a stated attempt to ensure the bc rule wasn't effectively changed. They put out a memo essentially stating they wanted bc called as if the rules hadn't changed.

1. Not everyone got that powerpoint memo.

2. New officials start every year that don't get old memos.

3. They said they were going to fix it this year. They failed.

This is not the only place where the casebook adds things which are not in the rulebook.

Thus Jeremy, why I say the rule depends on how long you've been officiating. ;)

They have told us more than one time to rule other plays as they were before team control change regardless of the apparent wording of the rule.

The only thing that has changed is the team control only applies to an offensive foul during a throw in. At one time, free throws would have been shot. If the offense fouls during a throw in, it is a TC foul and no free throws shot.

Example: During a throw in, A1 sets an illegal screen on B1. Previously if B was in the bonus they would have shot free throws. Now they do not. It is penalized as a TC foul.

I see and you can see my confusion as a first year official.