Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
Another play from camp.
Team A's first contact is directed toward the net. It's very tight to the net, so the setter for Team squats near the center line to dig it out of the bottom of the net.
Before the ball reaches the plane of the net, Team B blocker blocks the ball to the floor on A's side of the net.
I called the blocker for reaching over the net. The observer pointed out that it's only reaching over if the blocker takes away the opportunity for an offensive player to play the ball. And since the setter was nowhere near the ball, the definition "reaching over" hadn't been met. The setter wasn't trying to play the ball.
But in my mind she was going to play the ball, so I thought the blocker took that opportunity away. Thoughts?
|
On the surface, I would agree, unless the ball would have gone over the net. If that's the case, that would meet the conditions of a completed attack, as that blocker wouldn't have been the reason A was unable to complete their attack.