Strange situation

[illini]

rule 5.3.3, case book page 17, situation C after the first referee whistles and signals for the serve, the second referee sounds the whistle for a substitution.
Ruling: incorrect procedure, the ball is dead, substitution is denied, and a new whistle and signal for serve is given.

In my defense on this rule, I am substituting the word sub for time out, in either case the 2nd referee blew a whistle. By rule, you recognize the whistle, replay, sub and or time out is denied!

I do agree with MCbear, that no card is warranted in this situation. However, disagree with the fact the statement it is a free pass of allowing the subs. It is an inadverant whistle by R2, replay any corrective actions/timeouts are denied, by rule.

[BigToe]

I agree with Illini on this one. And yes, my partner and I talked about this afterwards. He is a very good official that just made a mistake on this one. Although I know I blew the whistle with the same amount of force as I had done all match with no one having any difficulties hearing me previously, maybe it was my fault as it seemed that only the server and I new I blew the whistle.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by illini

rule 5.3.3, case book page 17, situation C after the first referee whistles and signals for the serve, the second referee sounds the whistle for a substitution.
Ruling: incorrect procedure, the ball is dead, substitution is denied, and a new whistle and signal for serve is given.

In my defense on this rule, I am substituting the word sub for time out, in either case the 2nd referee blew a whistle. By rule, you recognize the whistle, replay, sub and or time out is denied!

I do agree with MCbear, that no card is warranted in this situation. However, disagree with the fact the statement it is a free pass of allowing the subs. It is an inadverant whistle by R2, replay any corrective actions/timeouts are denied, by rule.

If you look in the casebook at 11.2.1 Sit. A (a/b) it says the ruling is replay - neither timeout nor substitution is granted. Only caveat is that it is talking about the receiving team requesting the timeout, not the serving team, and in the comment it notes the reason for granting a replay is the coach's actions distracted the opponents serve. Note that it does not say whether or not the R2 acknowledged the request.....

If we don't grant the substitution request by the team R in this situation, it seems to me that allowing team S to do a replacement in the same situation is giving them an unfair advantage. I think this is another area where the wording of the rules hasn't caught up with the integration of the libero.

As I said earlier, the R2 really screwed the pooch. What they should have done is ignored the request by coach S, - if the server doesn't get the serve off in the required 5 seconds, it's the coach's own fault for distracting her own server - not up to us to bail them out on this.

[pavbref]

Ran into a similar situation tonight. During a JV best of 3 match (NHFS rules), the team that lost the first set sided out with the score tied at 23. The other team went back to serve with the wrong server. As soon as I completed my scan of the court, I whistled for serve, and at the same time, the coach, realizing that the wrong player went back to serve, asks the R2 for a timeout. His whistle was simultaneous with mine, so we whistled for a replay. Unfortunately, the coach got what she wanted --ie she got the correct server back to serve, and her team won the set and match. The coach is a referee in our chapter, and she knew that the ruling would be a replay when she asked for the timeout. This is an example of how a coach can use the rules to their advantage.

[MCBear]

Toe, you need to know the definition for a replay and for a re-serve. Your situation does not meet the definition of a re-serve (see Rule 8-1-6). By Rule 9-8-1a, the R2's whistle is considered to be inadvertent.

By Rule 8-1-6, no requests for interruptions (sub, time-out, line-up check) can be accepted and Libero replacements may not take place during a re-serve. HOWEVER, your play is NOT a re-serve...by definition, it is a replay and all requests, replacements, etc. are allowed and completely legal. It is imperative to know the language of the Rules Book.

Toolman, unfortunately, your rationalization is faulty. In the casebook situation you cited, the R2 never blew a whistle acknowledging the coach's request...the server was distracted by the request and therefore the R1 called a replay while denying the coach's request because it was improper.

Illini, there were NO subs...there were replacements that happened following the R2's incorrect T-O whistle. By definition per rule, the replacements are legal. 5-3-3 SIT. C is not applicable because it concerns an improper request for substitution. In Toe's situation, both teams had left the court and it took about 30 seconds to get them back on the court. Since we now have a replay situation, the Libero replacement is completely legal.

[BigToe]

Jan, thank you for the cite reference in the rulebook. Unfortunately, I do not have them on me right now but I will be sure to re-read those citations tonight.

[illini]

After hours of reading and talking with fellow volleyball officials, everyong agrees with Jan's ruling. However, wrong it may seem, the coach bought her subs with a timeout and no penalty, other then the timeout.

Bigtoe, thank you for the post, it was great to be challenge by a question and find so many different responses.

Illini