NFHS Part 1 Questions

[imaref]

Need other opinions on these two statements from this year's VB exam.

#12 appears to be an exercise in reading. I believe the answer is TRUE, but may only be partially true. It has to do with the timing of notification. The rule, 5.6.3 (b) includes the directive of notification "after the first dead ball". Question 12 does not contain that stipulation.

In #81, I believe the answer is FALSE. 12.2.6 states a head coach may stand during a dead ball to coach his/her players provided he/she is "in the libero replacement zone". However, #81 does not state where the coach is standing. Could this statement be interpreted otherwise because 12.2.6 specifically covers the location the coach must be to give instructions to his/her players?

Your help is appreciated!

[MCBear]

#12 is true as you surmised. The umpire is notified as soon as an illegal libero replacement is noticed by the libero tracker - hopefully this happens as soon as the two players exchange places and before the referee beckons for the serve. We want the AS (LT) to notify us immediately so that we have it caught in the same dead ball where it occurs.

#81 is false. The coach is allowed to stand during a dead ball to coach his/her athletes. Agreed, they are only allowed to be in the libero replacement zone, but the way the question reads, it is not a cardable offense just to be standing during a dead ball while coaching his/her athletes on the court. Remember not to read more than is in the question into it.

[imaref]

Thanks for the confirmation MCBear! Did you follow or get to DCI Finals here in Wisconsin this past weekend? Illinois did well Saturday....Cavaliers won the "ship" with Phantom taking second! I could not believe their hornline this year....I believe they took high bugle execution caption Sat. nite. "Ava Maria" knocks your socks off!

[MCBear]

Nope, I wasn't able to catch any corps shows this summer. The two main ones in my area are sponsored by Santa Clara Vanguard and Concord Blue Devils. This year, I was refereeing volleyball on both weekends when the shows were held - The California Finals in Sacramento during one weekend and JO's in Atlanta on the other.

Dang, Phantom is the bridesmaid again! Nothing against the Cavies, you know, but now that they have won it several times, it would be nice to see Phantom take home the championship. SUTA!

If you haven't heard Phantom's renditions of "Amazing Grace" and "Elsa's Procession to the Cathedral", you haven't heard their hornline at its very best!

[MCBear]

The DCI finals next year will be in the Rose Bowl. I know that it will be a fantastic week in Pasadena! Hopefully, I can schedule it so that I can take my wife there to attend semi's and finals on August 6th & 7th.

[imaref]

#24 - I believe is FALSE. 6.3.3 (b)..... the statement doesn't mention if CF's other foot is closer to the centerline than CB. What say you?

#34 - I feel this is also a FALSE statement because the libero is classified a "back row player", and as such, cannot set the ball using overhand finger action while on or in front of the attack line. 9.5.6 (b)

#42 - is FALSE as well. 9.5.1 (c)(1) defines "block attempt" as action without touching the ball and does not constitute a foul by a "back row player" when there was no contact with the ball.

Your interpretations MC?

[MCBear]

#24 is False - we don't reference the endline when we are judging overlapping, only the sidelines and centerline.

#34 is True - you fell into the trap that NFHS set this year in the Preseason Guide and the PowerPoint slide. The libero can finger set a ball from anywhere on the court, however, to be legal, the next contact must be from below the top of the net. In the scenario, the libero in the front zone, set the ball while it was below the height of the net and it crossed the net. Result - no foul, legal play.

#42 is False - since no contact was made, there was no back-row block.

Not my interpretations, but those of NFHS.

[imaref]

Thanks again MC.....Appreciate your help.....have a GREAT season!

wl

[FMadera]

imaref:

You need to make sure you understand the actual language regarding what back row players can or cannot do.

There is nothing whatsoever that limits where a libero can set from. The libero can set, using finger action, from anywhere on the court. The only limitation is what happens on the next contact. Libero finger set from attack zone, followed by attack from totally above net height: illegal attack. ANYTHING else: play on.

Too many people think the libero is not allowed to set...completely false.

[refnrev]

Originally Posted by FMadera

imaref:

You need to make sure you understand the actual language regarding what back row players can or cannot do.

There is nothing whatsoever that limits where a libero can set from. The libero can set, using finger action, from anywhere on the court. The only limitation is what happens on the next contact. Libero finger set from attack zone, followed by attack from totally above net height: illegal attack. ANYTHING else: play on.

Too many people think the libero is not allowed to set...completely false.

_____________________________
Completely true --- and well stated. A very common misconception.

[MCBear]

For cleaning up the libero limitations. I got careless in my post and did not complete the scenario.

[imaref]

I guess you two just cleared me up on "libero" subtleties

Many thanx......