3rd Time Out

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Doesn't the R1 have to inform the captain what the card is for?

not for YUD, I don't think. Possibly for a YC for misconduct.

Originally Posted by chapmaja

This isn't proper procedure either. The R2 is supposed to communicate with the scorer to assure the UD is properly noted on the score sheet. The UD needs to be recorded immediately.

We have a coach in my area that has developed a plan to use his UD Yellow's carefully and takes advantage of rules to give his team a break or get a "quick" time out.

Normally what he will do is send a sub to the substitution zone, then withdraw the substitution, resulting in an UD issuance. Since the R2 is required to make sure it is noted on the scoresheet, it gives him a few seconds to talk to his team before it is administered.

Our state association has been notified about this and has basically told our officials association that there is nothing to prevent him from doing it. They have said that it should not be considered as unsportsmanlike conduct because it is a situation covered within another area of the rules. (The UD rules).

Fair enough. Different areas do it differently. We would try to minimize the coach breaking momentum, getting additional time by having the R note the YUD and getting the action resumed ASAP and catching up on the scoresheet a bit later (unless the scorekeeper is on his / her toes and gets it recorded right away). I agree it's not unsporting conduct.

[genetoy71]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

...I agree it's not unsporting conduct.

Just curious - how would you interpret Rule 12 (Conduct) - 12.2.8.k: "Making any excessive requests designed to disrupt the set."?

If the number of timeouts per set is two and the coach purposefully requests more than two in order to play head games with the server, is this not "making an excessive request designed to disrupt the set"?

One other thing that I find odd that is sort of getting lost in this discussion thread - two JV/V officials working together and neither knew the proper penalty for a first UD in a set. It certainly is not point/loss of rally.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by genetoy71

One other thing that I find odd that is sort of getting lost in this discussion thread - two JV/V officials working together and neither knew the proper penalty for a first UD in a set. It certainly is not point/loss of rally.

They likely are stuck in the "few years ago" mode, when that was the penalty for a third timeout.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by genetoy71

Just curious - how would you interpret Rule 12 (Conduct) - 12.2.8.k: "Making any excessive requests designed to disrupt the set."?

This was generally more in the realm of sub counts, lineup checks every rotation, etc. Less applicable now that we have sanctions for delays. If a coach requests a third timeout, there's already a sanction in place for it. Get it recorded quickly, but you don't request an individual card for something that calls for an administrative sanction.

Now, if they complain about the sanction to the point of warranting one, at that time you can request the individual sanction.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by FMadera

This was generally more in the realm of sub counts, lineup checks every rotation, etc. Less applicable now that we have sanctions for delays. If a coach requests a third timeout, there's already a sanction in place for it. Get it recorded quickly, but you don't request an individual card for something that calls for an administrative sanction.

Now, if they complain about the sanction to the point of warranting one, at that time you can request the individual sanction.

I agree to some extent. With that said, If a team is continually using the lineup check requests to delay the set and then attempts to call an excess time out, we potentially do have an issue with unsportsmanlike conduct. Simply attempting to call a 3rd time out without a pattern of behavior indicating "gamesmanship" to me is filed under the YUD/RUD rules, not sportsmanship rules.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I agree to some extent. With that said, If a team is continually using the lineup check requests to delay the set and then attempts to call an excess time out, we potentially do have an issue with unsportsmanlike conduct.

No, you have an issue with a delay sanction that might need to be assessed. Use the proper sanction for the situation. Don't extrapolate beyond that.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by FMadera

No, you have an issue with a delay sanction that might need to be assessed. Use the proper sanction for the situation. Don't extrapolate beyond that.

No, you have an unsportsmanlike act which needs to be addressed as such. The problem is people are unwilling to penalize unsportsmanlike acts as what they are because they think there is an alternative penalty to use. If it is unsportsmanlike that penalty takes precedence over a YUD/RUD situation.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

No, you have an unsportsmanlike act which needs to be addressed as such. The problem is people are unwilling to penalize unsportsmanlike acts as what they are because they think there is an alternative penalty to use. If it is unsportsmanlike that penalty takes precedence over a YUD/RUD situation.

It's literally a delay. The problem is people using the wrong penalty for the situation.

If they delay after the delay warning, then you have a delay penalty. Go through the sanction scale. Even an intentional delay is still only a delay, whether you like them doing it or not.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

not for YUD, I don't think. Possibly for a YC for misconduct.



Fair enough. Different areas do it differently. We would try to minimize the coach breaking momentum, getting additional time by having the R note the YUD and getting the action resumed ASAP and catching up on the scoresheet a bit later (unless the scorekeeper is on his / her toes and gets it recorded right away). I agree it's not unsporting conduct.

I found out that an area opposing school has caught on to this tactic. The scorekeeper, who is a former long time varsity coach at the school, knows when it is coming and already had most of the YUD comment written by the time the R2 had turned around. The R2 then confirmed, gave the court back to the R1, who beaconed for serve. This was while the offending team was huddling in a pseudo-timeout. That result in an out of alignment call followed by a red card to the coach for UC.

Basically he tried pulling the same scheme one to many times with that opponent and this time the scorekeeper knew the scheme and as a result was ready for it when it happened. The coach didn't expect the process to be handled that quickly and as a result was caught with the team not paying attention.