No help from R2?

[oldsetter]

In a recent match in our pre-match discussion, when discussing ball handling, the R2 told me he was not going to help on any contacts - especially anything in open court. I explained that I definitely did want him to call the match, I did expect him to help on any contact he was sure I was blocked on OR any contact that he felt I did not have a good angle on assuming his other R2 duties did not preclude his help. I have had R2's that seem to want to help on every contact, but lately it seems to have gone to the other extreme. What do you guys expect or want from your R2? There was one contact during the match where the setter was in the middle of the court but was facing the R2 squarly and I only had a side view. The ball came out with some spin, but I did not see two contacts, I looked to the R2 who was looking at the setter, but got nothing from them. Then later he told me I missed that double.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by oldsetter

..I did expect him to help on any contact he was sure I was blocked on OR any contact that he felt I did not have a good angle on assuming his other R2 duties did not preclude his help...

This is what I expect.

[Antonio.King]

In terms of ball handling, I always tell my R2 that I won't look at them for anything ball handling unless I'm screened. If it's the case where I'm screened on a potential caught or thrown ball, I'll happily take their opinion, but if it's not offered, then I know to form my own opinion of that particular contact like I have been doing for the entire match.

There's also their ability to help on two attempts of playing the ball (double), but I don't count that as ball handling.

[oldsetter]

A. King,
I assume by screened, you would mean a players body between you and the ball. I would also wonder what criteria you would use for calling a 'double' (as in over hand setting motion) when you can not see both hands (contact points) due to the players relative position on the court to you?

Are you saying that there are no positions on the court or orientations of the players body that you do not want or need help from the R2?

Andy,
As your R2, any unusually contact that I have a very good view of, I would look at you to see if you glanced at me, I would have a discrete signal for you to ignore or take if you wanted it, or I like a slight head nod for play on. Hopefully there would be very few of these in the match. And I would think that a good R2 could adjust to the standards of the R1.

I had an official tell me that I should make the call (I'm mainly considering these doubles where you can't see both hands) based on what I see and not expect any help from the R2. My response was, that if I did not see two contacts or prolonged contact, then it was going to have to be legal. (Did not go over well.) Which the reply was that if it was over controlled it was prolonged and if it was under controlled it was a double. I don't mind an argument to develop good philosophies so I replied that I've been making this way too hard. I was actually looking for two contacts on doubles.

I find this very frustrating and appreciate any insight anyone is willing to provide. It appears that there is a discrepancy between the rule book and the way many official practice. Also I have found that many officials are very defensive about there ball handling philosophies. Whew. I guess if you are on shaky ground, you don't like to be challenged. ; )

[pavbref]

In my experience, I have seen R2's who want to call every fault, and R2's that barely are capable of handling their own responsibilities. Because I'm a newer official, I generally accept any help I can get from my team on ball handling.

I have found that most of our newer officials do not offer help either because they do not know how or because they do not have the confidence in making a call with a more experienced official. There are some experienced officials that allow their egos get in the way, and think that because they were assigned as an R2, that they don't need to help offer assistance.

I try to offer help by stepping away from the pole and discretely showing prolonged contacts and doubles, and if play continues, I move on with my responsibilities. I discuss this with my partner before the match, and try to discuss why my help was not accepted after the match to improve my abilities and techniques.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by oldsetter

There was one contact during the match where the setter was in the middle of the court but was facing the R2 squarly and I only had a side view. The ball came out with some spin, but I did not see two contacts, I looked to the R2 who was looking at the setter, but got nothing from them.

I would neither want nor expect help in this situation. Trying to read your mind on what angles you may or may not need help on (but you were not screened) is an invitation to throw up ball handling suggestions that will get you into trouble.

If the angle was such that you were not screened but still couldn't see two contacts, live with it. Inviting an R2 to give ball handling advice on non-screened contacts runs the risk of the R2's ball handling standard being what the coaches notice/expect, rather than your own.

[oldsetter]

Felix,
I can live with that, but the R2 is assuming your view is blocked in some situations where it may not be. No big deal, I don't want too much help either. I had an R2 give me at least 23 discrete ball handling signals in one SET one time. The level of play was not that bad at all. I was so amused with the R2 I started counting the signals. We played about 10 points before I started counting and got to 23. There were about 4 actual BHEs in that set. lol

When you live with it, do you you assume there is a double contact or do you not blow your whistle if you do not see a double contact?
Thanks,

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by oldsetter

When you live with it, do you you assume there is a double contact or do you not blow your whistle if you do not see a double contact?
Thanks,

If I am not prepared tell you what happened, I am not going to blow the whistle. No assumptions. Ever.

[blueump]

Originally Posted by oldsetter

Felix,
I can live with that, but the R2 is assuming your view is blocked in some situations where it may not be. No big deal, I don't want too much help either. I had an R2 give me at least 23 discrete ball handling signals in one SET one time. The level of play was not that bad at all. I was so amused with the R2 I started counting the signals. We played about 10 points before I started counting and got to 23. There were about 4 actual BHEs in that set. lol

When you live with it, do you you assume there is a double contact or do you not blow your whistle if you do not see a double contact?
Thanks,

I can only assume then, that the coaches also saw at least some of the "discrete" signals? That would then basically throw you under the bus for each time you didn't call something that the R2 was calling.

So, if the R2 was watching the ball all the time, who was doing the R2's job???

1 or 2, I could see...but if they get to 23...we are clearly having a discussion at the stand during a time-out or between sets, long before that!

[oldsetter]

thanks Felix,
I totally agree and respect that.
Play until you hear a whistle blow.

I just did not appreciate my R2 coming over during a time out to tell me I missed a double. I saw one hand and the ball. Came out a little 'mushy' but I did not - and could not have seen two contacts.

And yes, he was not doing his R2 duties, I called as many nets as he did. I hate to see a net violation while I see my R2 following the ball into the back court. Dummy, we have line judges, you stay on the net, I'll watch the ball.

lol,

As far a discrete signals go, there are not any. especially the illegal block signal.



I love this game.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by oldsetter

...Andy,
As your R2, any unusually contact that I have a very good view of, I would look at you to see if you glanced at me, I would have a discrete signal for you to ignore or take if you wanted it, or I like a slight head nod for play on. Hopefully there would be very few of these in the match. And I would think that a good R2 could adjust to the standards of the R1....

This is what I would prefer as an R1.....If I see something that I was not sure of due to angle or body position of the player, I would take a quick look at my R2. If s/he have a discreet signal in front of and close in to your body, I will take it, if not, we keep playing. I agree that I would not expect very many of these during the match.

When I am R2, if I see something that I feel should be called ball handling wise, I will give the discreet signal for a second, it's up to my R1 to take it or not...either way makes no difference to me. I will also say that as an R2, I try very hard to concentrate on my area of responsibility and there are very few instances where I would even have a good look at a ball handling fault.

[Antonio.King]

The responsibility of ball handling does not fall under the R2, and much like Felix has already stated, it can get you in trouble even if you're infrequently suggesting ball handling as the R2.

Whenever I'm the R1, and I'm working with someone brand new (that I haven't worked with before and have never seen them), I always start by saying I won't look at you for anything ball handling wise.

I would strongly urge against practicing the habit of offering help on ball handling as the R2. Everyone has a difference in opinion on what should and should not be called. Selling out your partner (because that's essentially what you're doing by questioning their judgement), does nothing for you in the long run.

A good R2 will prepare to defend their partner's judgement (not frequently mind you) regardless of their personal opinion on the matter. You're a team, and you're not there to step on one another; you're there to work together.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Antonio.King

....Whenever I'm the R1, and I'm working with someone brand new (that I haven't worked with before and have never seen them), I always start by saying I won't look at you for anything ball handling wise.

But in post #3, you stated:

Originally Posted by Antonio.King

....In terms of ball handling, I always tell my R2 that I won't look at them for anything ball handling unless I'm screened. If it's the case where I'm screened on a potential caught or thrown ball, I'll happily take their opinion...

These two statements seem to contradict each other....are you going to look to your R2 for help or not?

[Antonio.King]

I should clarify that the under normal circumstances (your first quote; not screened) I won't ever. If after making a legitimate effort to see something and I cannot, I'll happily glance; doesn't mean I'll take it, but I'll consider what you have to say.

In the past years of officiating, I've never taken a ball handling suggestion of any R2 if that helps give you any indication on how much that's practiced (it's usually newer officials that do this). I rarely put myself in a position as to where I can't judge something on my own. I do, however, tell my partners if I give them the deer in the headlight look, to be prepared, but I haven't had to give that yet. *knock on wood*

So to answer your question, no. In good practice and normal circumstances, no I won't. However, if something hits the fan quickly and I'm unable to form my own opinion on the matter because circumstances beyond my control, I'll take a glance.

Much like volleyball, this isn't a black and white answer. I'll tell you the practice favors black though.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Antonio.King

I'll tell you the practice favors black though.

I'm sure you understand why this made me smile. :-)