couple situations to check on

[refinks]

Thanks guys! I think I got it now. So in my situation I was wrong. I don't know why, apparently I was misinformed or misunderstood the rule, but I had always thought if an attack was completed at all by anybody after a back row setter set the ball while it was above the net, it was illegal. Now I know differently, and when I see that coach again I can tell her that I was mistaken, but that it didn't excuse her actions.

To add to that, a back row attack can only be illegal if the ball is completely above the height of the net, correct? I'll throw another situation at you and hope I didn't go 0 for 2 on these.

Setter serving, after serve comes up to the net, when the ball comes back on her side of the net, after a bump from a teammate, she jumps and dumps the ball over while it is above the net. This is a classic case of an illegal back row attack, and I called it, my partner said great job, that's not a call you see a lot in a middle school match.

Later on, a couple points later, setter still serving, same type of situation, only this time the setter, who is in front of the 10 foot line, bumps the ball over when it is clearly below the height of the net. I give the signal for a legal back row attack. After the play ended, the other coach wanted to know why that one wasn't an illegal back row attack, I simply told her that it was 2 different scenarios. In one, the ball was above the height of the net, and the other, it wasn't. I told her it's only illegal if the ball is above the height of the net. She didn't agree, telling me she thinks I am wrong and to please look it up. Very respectful, I said I would, but I'm 100% sure I'm right. So please tell me I'm right. *crossing fingers*

[Altor]

Originally Posted by refinks

Now I know differently, and when I see that coach again I can tell her that I was mistaken, but that it didn't excuse her actions.

I have admitted to coaches before when I kicked a rule and they asked me about it politely and then let it drop. I'm not sure I'd extend the same courtesy to someone who had to be penalized for sportsmanship.

I most certainly would not mention the second part. It would likely just come off as confrontational. No reason to start out a contest on that foot.

After thinking about it more, saying you were wrong and not mentioning her sportsmanship may give her reason to think that it's ok to act that way. So, I definitely just wouldn't say anything at all.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by refinks

So please tell me I'm right. *crossing fingers*

Spot on.

No attack is EVER illegal unless the contact of the ball is entirely above the height of the net AND the attack is completed. A back row attacker can attack the ball in front of the attack line...provided the ball isn't entirely above the height of the net.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by refinks

Thanks guys! I think I got it now. So in my situation I was wrong. I don't know why, apparently I was misinformed or misunderstood the rule, but I had always thought if an attack was completed at all by anybody after a back row setter set the ball while it was above the net, it was illegal. Now I know differently, and when I see that coach again I can tell her that I was mistaken, but that it didn't excuse her actions.

To add to that, a back row attack can only be illegal if the ball is completely above the height of the net, correct? I'll throw another situation at you and hope I didn't go 0 for 2 on these.

Setter serving, after serve comes up to the net, when the ball comes back on her side of the net, after a bump from a teammate, she jumps and dumps the ball over while it is above the net. This is a classic case of an illegal back row attack, and I called it, my partner said great job, that's not a call you see a lot in a middle school match.

Later on, a couple points later, setter still serving, same type of situation, only this time the setter, who is in front of the 10 foot line, bumps the ball over when it is clearly below the height of the net. I give the signal for a legal back row attack. After the play ended, the other coach wanted to know why that one wasn't an illegal back row attack, I simply told her that it was 2 different scenarios. In one, the ball was above the height of the net, and the other, it wasn't. I told her it's only illegal if the ball is above the height of the net. She didn't agree, telling me she thinks I am wrong and to please look it up. Very respectful, I said I would, but I'm 100% sure I'm right. So please tell me I'm right. *crossing fingers*

The two things to judge on a back row attack are the height of the ball (above or below) and if above, the location of the attackers feet when they leave the floor. If the ball is below, it can't be an illegal back row attack.

As for the coach telling me to "please look it up". At that point, I am either telling the coach to drop it, or pulling out the yellow card. I know the rules and I don't like being told to look it up. I find that unsportsmanlike.