couple situations to check on

[pavbref]

PHP Code:

Situation 2: JV game, definite talent discrepancy between the 2 teams. I'm R1. The significantly better team (for lack of a better description) likes to use quick attacks, where the setter will set the ball and almost immediately an attacker is spiking it. So, in this situation, the setter came from the back row. In this particular instance, for whatever reason, she decided to jump set, and clearly set the ball while it was completely above the net. As soon as the hitter hit the ball over the net on the next hit, I had a back row attack. Coach was very upset, insisting this could not be a back row attack because the setter is not the one that put the ball over the net, but rather one of her teammates did on the next hit. I disagreed, and the coach ended up getting a yellow card from me. A few points later, my partner gave her a red for continuing to argue the call. She eventually quieted down and stayed in the match, but had a few choice words for us after the match. No big deal, but now I'm second guessing myself. Did I make the right call on the back row attack? My partner thought I did, but he, like myself, was unsure of the rule. 


If the back row setter sets the ball in the front zone when the ball is entirely above the height of the net, two situations are faults. First if the ball is set into the plane of the net and is legally contacted by a blocker or is completely sent over the net, the setter is called with an illegal back row attack. Second, if the ball is blocked into the back row setter in the front zone while any part of her body is higher than the net, the fault is back row block.

In the situation you described, the play was legal, and the coach was correct.

[john5396]

In case 2 you got that call wrong.

If the back row setter played the ball above the net and it was an attack, ball that was directed across the net, then it was a back row attack.

The case you are thinking of is a limit on the libero. If the libero sets a ball with finger action while in the attack zone, and then a front row payer attacks the ball above the net you have a back row attack. This does not apply for other back row players. So a back row setter may set the ball above the height of the net as long as it is not directed across the net or into a legal blocker (above the net and played by the other team).

[TimTaylor]

Sit#1 - you are correct

Sit#2 - you were incorrect and the coach was right

pavbref gave you the correct rule.

I agree with john5396 that you are likely confusing the setter with the libero.

[Sco53]

Originally Posted by john5396

In case 2 you got that call wrong.

If the back row setter played the ball above the net and it was an attack, ball that was directed across the net, then it was a back row attack.

The case you are thinking of is a limit on the libero. If the libero sets a ball with finger action while in the attack zone, and then a front row payer attacks the ball above the net you have a back row attack. This does not apply for other back row players. So a back row setter may set the ball above the height of the net as long as it is not directed across the net or into a legal blocker (above the net and played by the other team).

When the libero hand sets on or in front of the attack line and the ball is attacked completely above the height of the net by any teamate it is a an illegal attack.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Sco53

When the libero hand sets on or in front of the attack line and the ball is attacked completely above the height of the net by any teamate it is a an illegal attack.

...only if the attack is completed.