davecasper Snaqwells wroteSeems to me the player did not violate even the new rule, as he had one foot "near" the lane line. One foot was very near the lane line, but his back foot may have been more than 3' away from the lane line.
Adam davecasper wroteOne foot was very near the lane line, but his back foot may have been more than 3' away from the lane line. Ah, that makes sense.