couple situations to check on

[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.