Attacking a ball in the Plane of the Net [USAV Rules]

[MCBear]

Good distinction, Felix!

[Seattle32]

I think I follow what you're suggesting: as long as some portion of the contact occurs over the player's court, then you deem that "the contact has been made within his/her own playing space".

The rub is that contact with the ball occurs over an area, not at a point, and the rules don't define "contact". Your reading is consistent with how the game is actually played, how it's actually officiated, how the ball "in" rule is written, how the "foot on the centerline" is written, and (IMHO) how the game ought to be.

The rules committee could have made this unambiguous with just two or three words:

"...provided that the contact has not been made completely beyond his/her own playing space."

Instead, we're forced to invent new concepts out of whole cloth to justify how the game is actually played: "at" the net versus "above" the net, etc.

To make sure I understand you:
1. Attacking a ball that's completely above the opponents' court: always a fault.
2. Attacking a ball that's at least partially above my court: only a fault if my ball contact was completely above the opponents' court.

Right?

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Seattle32

To make sure I understand you:
1. Attacking a ball that's completely above the opponents' court: always a fault.
2. Attacking a ball that's at least partially above my court: only a fault if my ball contact was completely above the opponents' court.

Right?

To be more accurate, I'd change "attacking" to "making contact," with the exception of a legal block.

The distinction would cover reaching over to set a ball that is contacted beyond the plane of the net.