Just guessing

[Scrapper1]

Well, I've come to the conclusion that when it comes to judging double hits during an overhand set, I'm simply guessing. Last night, I got a disbelieving open-mouthed reaction when I did not call a fault on a set that went (intentionally) behind the setter's head. And I got a "what was wrong with THAT?" when I called a double on what I thought was an obvious set where the left hand contacted first. When I asked my partner after the match if it was really that bad, he said, "Well. . . it was bad".

This was from a great coach, who is also a very good official. He has had issues with my ball-handling calls before.

So I'm left to conclude that I really don't know what I'm supposed to be judging. Things that are obvious to coaches and other officials, I simply don't see.

I know not to follow the ball, but watch the hands move to the ball. That's not really the problem. I guess I just don't know what I'm actually supposed to look for.

[bob jenkins]

I am glad to see you (and experienced official) post that. I (a newer official) am equally confused.

[Lcubed48]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I am glad to see you (and experienced official) post that. I (a newer official) am equally confused.

As a newer official I also suffer from that very thing, and I still continue to do so but on a lesser scale. The answer for me was simple - see more plays by working at the local volleyball club. It's helped, but it is work in progress. Keep working.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Lcubed48

As a newer official I also suffer from that very thing, and I still continue to do so but on a lesser scale. The answer for me was simple - see more plays by working at the local volleyball club. It's helped, but it is work in progress. Keep working.

Just like players...reps...reps...reps.

[DRJ1960]

So glad the boat I thought I was alone in is actually crowded

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by FMadera

Just like players...reps...reps...reps.

I've been doing this for literally a decade. And I don't half-@ss it. I try to improve. If I don't have enough reps at this point, I can't imagine that I'm going to get better.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I've been doing this for literally a decade. And I don't half-@ss it. I try to improve. If I don't have enough reps at this point, I can't imagine that I'm going to get better.

I've been doing this for 18 years. Probably have over 7000 matches as R1 under my belt. And I'm still working every year to get better.

If you think you can't get better after a decade, then you're right. You won't.

However, if you think you can, you can.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by FMadera

I've been doing this for 18 years. Probably have over 7000 matches as R1 under my belt. And I'm still working every year to get better.

If you think you can't get better after a decade, then you're right. You won't.

It seems to me that there's a difference between "realizing there's always room for improvement" and "having no idea what you're looking at". And it feels like I'm in the second category. It feels like every match, there's at least one contact where EVERYBODY knows I called it wrong. And when I replay it in my head, I would still swear that I was right.

So I am obviously not seeing what everybody else is seeing. That's not a statement about whether I can or can't get better. (As I said in my original post, I'm always trying to get better.) That statement says that I literally don't know what I'm looking at. That's how I feel this season.

[dbwill]

In the mists of history (as a player in the 80's) we would judge the quality of an overhand set mostly by the spin - any side spin at all or more than 2* rotations front or back was a double.

Now as a new ref I'm finding things are more relaxed, which is good for more play and fewer whistles, but also more challenging to be consistent. Also many of the spectators are of an age where perhaps they too remember judging by spin more than actual contact which is why they still like to grouse about hands.

* actual number was subject of vigorous debate!

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by dbwill

In the mists of history (as a player in the 80's) we would judge the quality of an overhand set mostly by the spin - any side spin at all or more than 2* rotations front or back was a double.

In this neck of the woods, we're now being told that spin is irrelevant. You can apply spin just as easily with one hand or finger as you can with two hands, so that can't be a reliable criterion for judging a double. At least, that's what we're being told.