Block...or not....
 

My partner and I had a disagrement on this.

HS match the other night, NFHS rules. I am R2

Ball is sent over the net by team A, team B front row player is back from the net a bit and jumps to block. She is late getting up and back from the net about three feet or so. Her initial contact of the ball came when a good portion of the ball was below the top of the net. She pushed the ball into the net, then bumped it up as it rolled out of the bottom of the net. I am immediately thinking double contact since the first contact of the ball occurred below the top of the net and did not meet the definition of a block. I discreetly signaled a double to my partner, but she did not whistle. So, I blew my whistle and stopped play.

I went across the court to my partner to tell her what I had and she tells me that she saw it, but ruled the first contact as a block, so the action was legal. We work together quite a bit and I respect her, so we agreed to replay the point.

1. Do I have the correct interpretaion for NFHS rules? I realize that it would be much easier to see the play in person, but any comments are welcome.

2. Should I have stopped play or just letit go and talk about it later? Neither coach said anything at the time of the play.

1. You shouldn't be blowing the whistle for that. At the very least, offer up the discreet double, if it's not whistled by the R1, let the point play out, ask to come across after the rally and discuss it at that time. Now you have a replay that could possibly be avoided.

2. Your interpretation may have been correct, but for the wrong reason. A blocker is defined by reaching higher than the net, but the ball does *not* have to be above the net when contacted in order to be a block. However, a blocker is also defined as being "close to the net," so if the blocker was truly three feet from the net, that would be a hard sell.

And you can have a block when the ball is below the tape how?:confused: Sounds like a first hit to me.

rev...read the definition of a block in 9-5-1c:

Please note that the location of the ball is not considered in determining whether it is a block or not as Felix posted in #2. If the player is above the top of the net in close proximity, it would be a block, not first contact.

Jan,
I'm not arguing so don't think I'm being a jackass here. I do some really good schools and it's a sincere question with which I am wrestling and want to "own" this rule next season to be the best official I can be. Three scenarios are running through my head:

1. Girl's hands are above the net in blocking position. Ball is below the tape on top of net. She reaches down and contacts the ball below the tape. Block or 1st hit or great possibilty of illegal hit?

2. Ball crosses net as front row player is near the net. Contact is made after the cross and ball is below the tape. Block... or first hit?

3.Quoting Felix: "However, a blocker is also defined as being "close to the net...'" She's close to the net but feet on floor with (A) arms extended over her head or (B) Arms not extended ... when contact is made. Ball is below the top of the net when contacted. Block... or 1st hit?

First, THERE IS NO ILLEGAL HIT UNLESS YOU *SEE* AN ILLEGAL HIT. :D Don't get suckered into an automatic call. That said...

It is not where the ball is contacted, it is solely whether any part of the blocker is above the net during the blocking action.

If no part of the blocker is above the net, it's not a block. If part of the blocker (hands or head) is above the net, there's a blocking action, and there's contact, it's a block. Even if the contact is made below the net.

Again, where the ball is doesn't matter, it's whether the blocker is above the net. If the blocker's hands are above the net and the ball is hit into a shoulder below the net, we have a block. Period.[/quote]

a) depends on if she's reaching above the net. If so, block. If not, no block.
b) see a)

Ball position means NOTHING when determining a block in these cases.

From a purely logical point of view...

The blocker can only control his/her position. The blocker cannot control where the hitter "puts" the ball. Therefore the rule quite logically concerns itself only with the blocker's position, and not the location of the ball.

Thanks, Felix! Your responses are what I would have told refnrev also.

I learned something today from this forum. I have been miscalling this play.

Thanks