Two hits
 

I worked a match recently in which one team's bench complained that I was not calling double hits, to the point where I issued a yellow card to the assistant for gesturing about it several times. I seem to have trouble seeing this fault, and the head coach seemed to think that it was there on every other rally.

Do you have any suggestions for recognizing the double hits? Is it a fault just because the setter tries to set the ball to one side? Adding to this is the NCAA directive this year to be slightly more lenient on ball-striking in some cases. So I'm kind of at a loss for this particular call. Any help would be appreciated.

Scrapper, the only real way to determine doubles is to see them. Disregard spin (although it MAY be a clue) and the player's body position. The easiest way to pick up a double is to focus on the hands of the player when she contacts the ball. Avoid following the ball into the hands - you won't be able to pick up the multiple contacts at all.

Good for you on carding the assistant coach for inserting herself/himself into the match. Since the ball-handling is always a judgment call, I may cut the head coach a little slack (very little!), but I have no tolerance for assistant coaches trying to influence my calls or trying to make me look bad (I can do that all by myself without any help!).

Since you use NCAA rules, the NCAA ball-handling directive applies, but it sounds like your coaches still want ball-handling called the same old way - tight. The thing to remember with the directive is that the player has to be making an athletic play on the ball for the minor double to be ignored. If the player catches it or chucks it over the net, it should still be called - we do not ignore the catch or the throw if it occurs.

Hope that is a little help.

"Athletic Play" leniency
 

Additionally, it was made crystal clear at the Big Ten rules meeting (and also at the Great Lakes Regions newest USAV rules meeting... because its coming to USAV as well)... leniency on "athletic plays" is ONLY to be given when the ball is being passed to another team contact (usually setter to attacker). If it´s a double-contact that is deemed an athletic play, but the ball´s next legal contact is by an opponent, then a double-contact fault must be called. It was made clear that the rule is not in place to allow an advantage to that team. So, only possible leniency on 1st contact going to a 2nd contact, or a 2nd contact going to a 3rd contact... never on a ball going over (or more accurately, legally contacted by opposing team). And the leniency should only affect a "tiny percentage" of your judgement calls.

There is no leniency required on 1st contact going to 2nd contact, as multiple contacts on 1st contact (in one play of the ball) is never illegal, no matter how bad it is.

As a ref, your visual acuity is more focused on player (ball handling) rather than ball. You're eyes are beating the ball to player and not following the ball. In simplicity, line judging, you're eyes never follow the ball. You will not see the floor contact, when it's a blurr.

If the NCAA way comes to USAV, then this is seriously gonna change the way how coaching player skills gets done following afterwards. Pros and cons to everything.

True. I was just providing an example to depict leniency on the contact passing to an additional team contact. I assumed we all know 1st hit can be multiple contact provided it´s one motion of playing the ball. But your clarification removes any "judgement of 1st contact" confusion.

Thank you both for these very practical suggestions. I will start trying to work on this more this week.

I discovered that this is also important when watching the net as R2. I had a hard time determining if the ball or the hands contacted the net. And then last week, out of the blue, I realized that when I picked a spot on the net and just watched that spot, I saw the action much more clearly.

So my mission for this week is to find the hands, and just watch the hands, not the ball. Thanks!

Scrapper, one other thing that none of us have remembered to post...make sure that you are only moving your eyes when you are following play, not your head. If your head is moving as you focus in on the hands (as R1) or the net (as R2), your vision will not be nearly as good as if your eyes follow the play and your head remains as steady as possible. Good luck implementing the various suggestions. Let us know how things work for you.

Professional baseball umpires receive the same training. The instructors use the analogy of a camera: what kind of image will you have if your camera is moving when you take the shot? Keep your head still when you need to make a call (ball handling, tip/no tip, in/out, etc.).

I actually move a lot. It's not about moving and trying to see, I would've moved already to be in the best position to see.

About the not moving your head, you still need to turn your head at times. Two eyes are much better than one. Also that I wear glasses and seeing out of the corner of the lense isn't always the best. Sometimes you have to look up to measure if a ball is into anteanna, sometimes you have to look down right at your feet where the ball lands.

Don't become too focused on holding your head still, do what's more naturally reflexive. Most of the time, you don't need to move, sometimes it's the difference between a iffy call and an accurate call.

To my mind, the issue isn't so much whether to move, but when (and when to be still).

Just another thank you for the help with this. I did a match yesterday, and although I'm quite sure I wasn't perfect, I began to see it a little bit better. My partner (a college assignor) and I watched the setters together during warm-ups and he said "that one's good" or "that one's not good" and sometimes I saw the difference and sometimes I didn't. But he was very helpful, as were the comments in this thread. So thanks again to you folks who have really helped me a lot this season.