Hypothetical Setting Scenario

[OmniSpiker]

Okay here's one out of the blue:

Setter is front row:
Setter is attempting to set the ball. The setter misjudges the ball and expects it to be an overpass. Setter jumps up in an attempt to block. The timing is good, only that the ball is not going to penetrate the plane of the net. If the setter kept the blocking hands up the ball would have fallen on the back of the hands. The setter then uses a back hand style of setting with the fingers and thumbs, creating a dish with the back of the hands. With an instantaneous flick of the wrists, the setter manages to pull off a clean contact with both hands in equal motion but apart, basically back of the finger actions only from both hands. There is no prolong contact but a shifting movement while contacted to redirect the ball up. Fundamentally it is not an overhand set/pass, although a perfectly good set ball was accomplished. A teammate intercepts the ball with a successfully completed attack.

Is this a double contact violation?

[MCBear]

OmniSpiker, it is a double contact only if the ball went hand to hand or if it was contacted twice (in the words of Homer Simpson, "Doh!"). From your description, the play was legal although unorthodox.

[OmniSpiker]

Yeap! That was too easy.

I'll have to think of another one,...

[OmniSpiker]

Another one: real test

Setter is front row
Setter is in the ideal setter's position. A pass is made which requires the setter to move away from the ideal setter's position. Setter is forced to reach with their hands to perform a set. In that instant the setter decides to perform their set as a dump. In the action of dumping the ball the setter has to set the ball in a direction out of the midline of their body over their left shoulder. The setting fundamentals are not applicable as the posture of the setter was somewhat contorted. The execution is performed with both hands with a lot of emphasis on wrist flicking but fair equal contact and looks clean. Their is no prolong contact. A rebound angle is not applicable by measuring the perpendicular line of the shoulders of the setter as the ball was infuentially redirected by the action of the setter. So it looks like the setter was going to set the ball, only to change the setting into a redirected play with the wrist flicks out of the midline angle of the setter. The dump is succesful.

(Putting aside ugly and illegal.) Is this a lift/carry/throw?

[MCBear]

Sorry, Omni...once again, completely legal and no whistle!


Posted by OmniSpiker:

The execution is performed with both hands with a lot of emphasis on wrist flicking but fair equal contact and looks clean. Their is no prolong contact.

[Vb Scrub]

Does not matter where the hands are, where the hands go, where the ball is in relation to the mid-line, where the pass comes from or where the set/dump goes. All that matters is that the play on the ball was made as one contact and the ball was not caught or thrown (USAV definition).

[OmniSpiker]

good one!

I should've figured you're just too objectified!

Now from the perspective of the setter who performed just that with the exact same scenario. What if the setter knew that they were really performing a lift/carry/throw? I realize that an authoritively executed set may not called as illegal. Opinions?

Is this the gray area that when officiating is force to make that judgement call?

[OmniSpiker]

Originally posted by Vb Scrub
Does not matter where the hands are, where the hands go, where the ball is in relation to the mid-line, where the pass comes from or where the set/dump goes. All that matters is that the play on the ball was made as one contact and the ball was not caught or thrown (USAV definition).

I suppose it would matter, if we're talking beach, but this was not case. However I'm heavily influence by beach, so the transistion of setting consistency is always a constant scrutiny.

[FMadera]

Now from the perspective of the setter who performed just that with the exact same scenario. What if the setter knew that they were really performing a lift/carry/throw? I realize that an authoritively executed set may not called as illegal. Opinions?

Make a deal with the setter. I won't set if you stop trying to ref.

In other words, I really couldn't care less what a setter "knows" he/she is doing, I base my call on what I see.

[OmniSpiker]

Originally posted by FMadera

Make a deal with the setter. I won't set if you stop trying to ref.

In other words, I really couldn't care less what a setter "knows" he/she is doing, I base my call on what I see.

Thanks, for confirming that I was only scrutinizing myself from both perspectives. I don't have that soft touch that exceptional setters do, so I would have to compensate for it somehow. It dawned upon me that I could essentially set with extremely fast hand speed utilizing a catch/lift/throw technique. Fundamentally accentuating clean contact techniques for my setting. I know for sure the fine line when I utilized a catch/lift/throw with somewhat of prolong contact, which isn't so obvious when executed with extremely fast hand speed. So bottom line is I know whenever I pull a set non-perpendicular to the line of my shoulders, it's a throw, although executed cleanly.

It's a good thing I don't ref against myself, heh, heh, heh. That's my ref/setter deal.