Quote:
Originally Posted by BigToe
This is a bit off topic but I do think it relates. I have worked with many very good officials and most if not all of them tell me to call what I see, not what I think. The oddity to me is on 4 contacts specifically when we are talking about the ball hitting the top of the net. Several officials have said if they are not sure, they let play continue. I see this as a contradiction. Call what you see except when it comes to ball hitting top of the net. If that happens and you didn't see a touch but you are not sure, let play continue. I am not trying to start an argument or flame anyone. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around this.
As for ball hitting top of the next, I always call 4 contacts if I am not 100% sure there was no touch. I have worked with people that have let play continue unless they were 100% sure there was no touch. To each their own I guess.
|
Well let me ask you this: would you apply the same when judging other faults? If there's a back row attack and you're not 100% sure it was legal would you call it? Or you're not positive if the server stepped on the end line while serving, you'd call that one too? By that logic, you will get yourself in a world of trouble if you answered "yes" to any of these.
You have to give the players the benefit of the doubt unless what you see tells you otherwise. This is why it's nice to have a partner who can give you information for situations where you aren't 100% positive. I probably wouldn't say to adopt that practice for obvious reasons.
An official shall not whistle a fault if they are not positive a fault has occurred.