No help from R2?

[oldsetter]

Well, i have two thoughts.
1. How does the R2 know when you are screened. Sometimes you may be, sometimes you may not. So, if he thinks you are screened and offers help, If you want it you are thankful, and if not, you feel like you are 'under the bus'.

2. Under the bus: Well, the R2 gives discrete help on 4 hits and back row faults.
Are you under the bus if you decide not to take it? How is this different than ball handling. Keep in mind I am not a proponent of the R2 making lots of ball handling calls, but the signals are in the rule book for a reason - and non of them are discrete.

3. And the R2 is now authorized to call back row violations if the R1 misses them, even though I will give the discrete signal first. Of course, if the R1 is not inclined to look at the R2 unless he is screened,


I guess that is 3 thoughts.........

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by oldsetter

Well, i have two thoughts.
1. How does the R2 know when you are screened. Sometimes you may be, sometimes you may not. So, if he thinks you are screened and offers help, If you want it you are thankful, and if not, you feel like you are 'under the bus'.

2. Under the bus: Well, the R2 gives discrete help on 4 hits and back row faults.
Are you under the bus if you decide not to take it? How is this different than ball handling. Keep in mind I am not a proponent of the R2 making lots of ball handling calls, but the signals are in the rule book for a reason - and non of them are discrete.

3. And the R2 is now authorized to call back row violations if the R1 misses them, even though I will give the discrete signal first. Of course, if the R1 is not inclined to look at the R2 unless he is screened,


I guess that is 3 thoughts.........

1. You cover this in the pre-match. If I'm screened on a ball handling situation, you'll see a "deer in the headlights" look, that means, "I need help." Barring that, don't offer help.

2. Provided you cover it appropriately prematch, no. From the floor, a ball may look more "above the net" than from the stand, and a player may look like she touches the line when you are looking from the floor 10+ feet away moreso than if you are looking down on the play. You offer help, I either whistle or give a safe signal, and we go from there. No throwing under the bus unless the R2 says something like, "I TRIED TO TELL HIM SHE WAS BACK ROW BUT HE WOULDN'T LISTEN." Apples and oranges.

3. Now you're either stretching so far you're pulling a hamstring or intentionally trying to stir the pot. When has anyone said they only want help on ANY violation if they were screened? This was about ball handling, not all R2 assistance in general.

Again, cover it in your pre-match, and the likelihood is much greater that all will be well, but if you don't discuss these situations and how you want to handle them should they arise, then you run the risk of having controversy that otherwise could have been averted.

[oldsetter]

one of the worst 'discrete' signals ever, back row attack! Not discrete at all.

[Antonio.King]

Sure it is, if you're not flailing it around. Just lay it across your chest.

[oldsetter]

oh, I meant back row block. Careless typing.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by oldsetter

oh, I meant back row block. Careless typing.

And probably the situation where you need to be least discreet. The R2 shouldn't put this one up unless contact is certain, and hopefully there will be no overrule by the R1, which really means no need for a covert signal on this one.