Differences of Opinion

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by APG

It's not a violation to cause the ball to have BC status. If what you said was true, you would have an immediate violation as soon as A threw any ball into the backcourt.

I understand what sniper was saying and what Mark is claiming about the touch being simultaneously the last front court and the first back court touch. . However, i agree with Camron that the rule itself shows that this isn't a violation. It uses the word BEFORE. "last to touch the ball BEFORE it went into the back court." When A touched this ball while standing in the back court, that touch put it in the back court. what was the touch before that one? Bs. if you say the touch is simultaneously the last and the first you are taking the word BEFORE out of the rule.
also, the rule definitions also show us that the ball is either IN the front court or IN the back court. one or the other. there is no simultaneous provision in the definitions, the rules etc. i have seen many case interps come out just dead wrong….