The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Volleyball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 10:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Missed this one yesterday

HS V game.

Team S setter is in the back row, she is up near the net waiting for a pass from her teammate. The pass is long and goes over the net. Team R player jumps and hits the ball down into the Team S setter. Setter is facing the net with her hands about at the height of her head, she does not jump and her hands were not above the top of the net. The ball rebounds up off of her hands, then she is the first to contact the ball.

I believe this should have been called a double contact, am I right?
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 11:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 440
Yes
__________________
Bill Hohn is the MAN!!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 11:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 640
Send a message via ICQ to FMadera Send a message via AIM to FMadera Send a message via Yahoo to FMadera
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
HS V game.

Team S setter is in the back row, she is up near the net waiting for a pass from her teammate. The pass is long and goes over the net. Team R player jumps and hits the ball down into the Team S setter. Setter is facing the net with her hands about at the height of her head, she does not jump and her hands were not above the top of the net. The ball rebounds up off of her hands, then she is the first to contact the ball.

I believe this should have been called a double contact, am I right?
Yes, as it was successive contacts. If you were going to call the first contact a block, then you would have had an illegal block. In either case, a fault should have been whistled.
__________________
Felix A. Madera
USAV Indoor National / Beach Zonal Referee
FIVB Qualified International Scorer
PAVO National Referee / Certified Line Judge/Scorer
WIAA/IHSA Volleyball Referee
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 11:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 962
Talking

As mentioned you should have had something on this one. Don't feel bad I missed one last week similar situation bad pass setter went up to get as it entered plane of the net blocker sent it back into back row setters hands which were over the height of the net. Should have been a back row block by rule I know this NOW as I looked it up afte the game I was worried about illegal back row attack and talked myself out of it since setter was not attacking the ball but trying to set it back to her side.... Totally missed the part if she's above the net and blocker legally sends ball into her it's a back row block. I learned something which as you know Andy with my thick skull it's hard to get much through it
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 12:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 640
Send a message via ICQ to FMadera Send a message via AIM to FMadera Send a message via Yahoo to FMadera
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED View Post
I was worried about illegal back row attack and talked myself out of it since setter was not attacking the ball but trying to set it back to her side....
...which really isn't the criteria you'd use to determine an illegal attack...
__________________
Felix A. Madera
USAV Indoor National / Beach Zonal Referee
FIVB Qualified International Scorer
PAVO National Referee / Certified Line Judge/Scorer
WIAA/IHSA Volleyball Referee
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 02:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMadera View Post
...which really isn't the criteria you'd use to determine an illegal attack...
Ok enlighten me. How can it be an attack if the offensive player wasn't directing the ball toward the other court? If I look at 5.1b I see:
"Attack Any action other than a block or a serve that directs the ball toward the opponent's court. A team's third hit is always considered an attack. A completed attack occurs the instant the ball completely crosses the vertical plane of the net, or is legally contacted."

So if her action was to direct the ball away from the other teams court and it was only that teams second hit, how could it be considered an attack? Again I'm trying to learn here, my thought is if it isn't an attack by definition then it couldn't be an illegal back row attack. What am I missing?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 02:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMadera View Post
Yes, as it was successive contacts. If you were going to call the first contact a block, then you would have had an illegal block. In either case, a fault should have been whistled.
This was exactly my line of thinking after the fact.

Just came here for a second opinion. My partner was one of those guys that wouldn't know a back row fault if the the player announced it to him....
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 04:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 640
Send a message via ICQ to FMadera Send a message via AIM to FMadera Send a message via Yahoo to FMadera
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED View Post
Ok enlighten me. How can it be an attack if the offensive player wasn't directing the ball toward the other court? If I look at 5.1b I see:
"Attack Any action other than a block or a serve that directs the ball toward the opponent's court. A team's third hit is always considered an attack. A completed attack occurs the instant the ball completely crosses the vertical plane of the net, or is legally contacted."

So if her action was to direct the ball away from the other teams court and it was only that teams second hit, how could it be considered an attack? Again I'm trying to learn here, my thought is if it isn't an attack by definition then it couldn't be an illegal back row attack. What am I missing?
For example, if the ball were in the plane of the net when contacted by her, then legally contacted by the blocker, regardless of her intent, it would be a completed attack, and thus, illegal by rule. Intent is not the consideration here, and shouldn't be the determining factor.
__________________
Felix A. Madera
USAV Indoor National / Beach Zonal Referee
FIVB Qualified International Scorer
PAVO National Referee / Certified Line Judge/Scorer
WIAA/IHSA Volleyball Referee
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 07:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Tustin, Michigan
Posts: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMadera View Post
regardless of her intent, it would be a completed attack, and thus, illegal by rule. Intent is not the consideration here, and shouldn't be the determining factor.
Exactly! Call the ball and the action, not what the player is TRYING to do.

Had this same exact call the other night myself. Back row setter tried to go up to save an overpass above and over the plane of the net and the ball was hit back into her hands. I know what she wanted to do, but it had no bearing on what really happened. Back row block - period!
__________________
"When I umpire I may not always be right, but I am always final!"
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 20, 2012, 10:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMadera View Post
For example, if the ball were in the plane of the net when contacted by her, then legally contacted by the blocker, regardless of her intent, it would be a completed attack, and thus, illegal by rule. Intent is not the consideration here, and shouldn't be the determining factor.
I see what you are saying, if the ball is still moving forward as she touched it and it's then contacted it's an attack regardless of intent. My case the setter hadn't contacted it yet, so no attack....but as I admitted should have been a back row block.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Saw this yesterday Rufus Baseball 19 Tue Apr 26, 2011 01:54pm
had a first yesterday shipwreck Softball 11 Mon Mar 21, 2011 03:45pm
I wasn't at my best yesterday, please help! LIIRISHMAN Softball 37 Mon May 18, 2009 05:13pm
Passed on a T yesterday, why? Coltdoggs Basketball 32 Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:14pm
Yesterday was not fun... AlabamaBlue Softball 9 Mon Apr 07, 2003 12:13pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:32pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1