out of bounds vs 4 hit call

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Antonio.King

Sounds like an attack into the net and out of bounds vs an attack into the block and out of bounds.


1) This is not in the line judge's jurisdiction. Their jurisdiction is to tell us the result of the rally with respect to touches, and the ball being out of bounds or inbounds. Determining whether the opposing team touched the ball before the ball landing out of bounds on that team's side isn't part of their responsibilities.

This is something that has to be in your pre-match on how you'll handle this should this situation arise. It's always in mine, because I've seen what happens to others when they aren't prepared for it.

As the second referee, I always will go to the side I think is at fault while pointing toward that team with an open hand. That typically communicates to the first referee the team I'm pointing gto was likely at fault. I only do this on plays where the first referee is looking for my assistance, or on something I think they might need help with.

I've worked with partners who ask me to use the "4" signal (preemptively and on purpose), while shaking my head. Whatever signal you use, is irrelevant. What matters is that you communicate how you'll handle this situation should it happen.

It's kind of ironic, what line judges are and are not allowed to rule (or have input) on.

Attacker hits ball into block and it lands out of bounds on the blocker's side: LJ signals touch, ruling it out of bounds off the blocking team.

Attacker hits ball and the ball lands on the attack side: Unless the attacking team has the ball blocked into them, LJ can only signal out, and it becomes a referee decision as to off of whom the ball was out. However, said ball is blocked back into the attacker and lands out? Now the LJ can once again give input as to who touched it last, signalling touch.

I can see why this would be confusing to people.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by FMadera

It's kind of ironic, what line judges are and are not allowed to rule (or have input) on.

Attacker hits ball into block and it lands out of bounds on the blocker's side: LJ signals touch, ruling it out of bounds off the blocking team.

Attacker hits ball and the ball lands on the attack side: Unless the attacking team has the ball blocked into them, LJ can only signal out, and it becomes a referee decision as to off of whom the ball was out. However, said ball is blocked back into the attacker and lands out? Now the LJ can once again give input as to who touched it last, signalling touch.

I can see why this would be confusing to people.

And it can get even more confusing - you have an attack/block situation at the sideline and the ball hits the antenna. The line judge first indicates the "out" by waving the raised flag and pointing at the antenna, then indicates which team last touched it before it hit the antenna.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

And it can get even more confusing - you have an attack/block situation at the sideline and the ball hits the antenna. The line judge first indicates the "out" by waving the raised flag and pointing at the antenna, then indicates which team last touched it before it hit the antenna.

And this is another good pre-match thing to discuss. I tell my line judges that I only want that full sequence if the referee signals the antenna fault and then looks their way for help on who committed the fault. If the referee whistles and there is no looking for help (i.e., the referee is owning the call), just signal antenna so we don't have two different calls.