Shorthanded team and back row attack, or not

[Back In The Saddle]

Did a men's church league tournament tonight. Actually, it's not even as impressive as that sounds. In the men's tournament there were only two teams, and one of them only had four players. And that is where the controversy began.

We opted to play the match rather than forfeiting. My initial intention was that I would consider 3 of the 4 to be front row. The obvious choice for the back row would seem to be the server. But, the first time the server came up to hit, which was probably the third or fourth rally of the match, I changed my mind and didn't call it. I figured that they were at enough of a disadvantage, and that if the other team couldn't find a way to beat them fairly easily, that was there problem.

So, sure enough, the shorthanded team loses the first game, but pulls out the second (playing best 2 of 3). At 11-12 in the deciding game, the other team calls timeout and wants to discuss the matter. I'm having none of it, end the conversation rather abruptly, and call for serve. I'm not about to change how I'm calling the game, discuss what I'm calling and not calling, nor change how I'm calling the game at this point. If they have an issue, they should have brought it up in the first time it happened.

And, of course, the shorthanded team wins. And the other team wants to cry and whine about how they got robbed.

Sigh.

Oh well, I'm over it.

Anyway, I would like your opinion. Was I wrong to ignore this? How might you have handled the situation?