The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Volleyball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 28, 2014, 12:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,181
Whats the call

A1, the Team A setter, contacts the ball while it is still not completely above the height of the net, but is in such a position that part of the ball is in the plane of the net. B2, the opposition's middle, goes up and contacts the ball?

What's the call?

This was brought up to me by a coach who had it called against his team earlier this season. (NFHS rules). The official in question called an illegal back row attack.

I don't see this as a correct call, because to be an illegal back row attack, the ball must be completely above the height of the net, which it was not.

The question then becomes is this an illegal back row block? Again, given the definition of a block, this can't be an illegal back row block.

so what's the call? I think it is a no call.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 28, 2014, 01:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 619
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 chapmaja View Post
The question then becomes is this an illegal back row block? Again, given the definition of a block, this can't be an illegal back row block.
Why not?
__________________
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
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 28, 2014, 01:20pm
Moderator M-800
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
There are three things you did not say that are in play here.

First - you say the ball is in the plane of the net, and I assume you mean the horizontal plane of the top of the net. The important unanswered question here is whether the ball has crossed the VERTICAL plane of the net.

If it has not - the actions by the blocker are illegal. You cannot block a setter setting the ball if the ball is entirely on the setter's side of the net.

If it HAS, this play by the blocker / hitter is actually coached at the highest levels, and is legal.

Second - if the ball has touched the vertical plane of the net, thus making the defender's block/hit legal - you did not say whether part of the setter's body (usually hands) was above the horizontal plane of the net. If not - if it's just the ball crossing that horizontal plane, the actions of the setter are legal and this should have been a no call.

If the setter's hands were across the horizontal plane of the net while contacting the ball when (or after) the defender contacted the ball... then the setter has, indeed, blocked the ball.

Third - you do not say, although you imply, that the setter is a back row player. I'm assuming she is - and if she is, the block by the setter is, in fact, illegal and your referee called it correctly. If she is not, of course, this is nothing.

So it's possible this referee's call was correct. If the ball had crossed the vertical plane of the net, and the setter was indeed a back row player, and the setter's hands crossed the horizontal plane of the net when she contacted the ball... the referee was correct. If any of these are not true - your referee erred.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 28, 2014, 01:23pm
Moderator M-800
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
See (2) in this: Top 4 Basic Rules in Volleyball Every Competitive Volleyball Player Should Know for part of your answer.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 28, 2014, 04:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 630
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
That's some excellent information. Thanks.
__________________
THE FLY IS OPEN, LET'S GO PEAY
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 30, 2014, 08:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 138
I miss read the OP. I think this would be a no call. No rule has been broken.

Last edited by oldsetter; Thu Sep 25, 2014 at 11:28pm.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 23, 2014, 11:30am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 87
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldsetter View Post
If the ref determined that the ball was directed to the opponents, it would be a BRA. If there was simultaneous contact with the ball in the plane, it is a BRB regardless of the setters intent or if the blocker directs the ball back into the setter while the setter is still above the height of the net, it is also a BRB.
Can you please provide a rule reference for either a BRA or BRB violation in this situation?

It is my understanding that a player cannot be called for any BRB violation if they have no part of their body above the height of the net (and are not involved in a collective block).

It is also my understanding that a player cannot be called for any BRA violation if the ball is not completely above the height of the net (notwithstanding a libero with setting action on/in front of the attack line).

Further, I am unaware of any rule that specifically prohibits "simultaneous contact with the ball in the plane" if the BR player has no body part above the top of the net.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 23, 2014, 11:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 87
Post

My emphasis added to the original question, to avoid misunderstanding about the OP's original intent. I don't believe that I am changing the OP's post at all. Only adding clarification for his/her original question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chapmaja View Post
A1, the BACK ROW Team A setter, contacts the ball while it is still not completely above the height of the TOP of the net, but is in such a position that part of the ball is in the VERTICAL plane of the net. B2, the opposition's middle, goes up and contacts the ball?
I believe that OP is correct. No call in this situation.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 23, 2014, 03:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 619
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 timasdf View Post
My emphasis added to the original question, to avoid misunderstanding about the OP's original intent. I don't believe that I am changing the OP's post at all. Only adding clarification for his/her original question.



I believe that OP is correct. No call in this situation.
We don't know this. The OP doesn't say where the blocker's body is in relation to the net; only that the ball is not entirely above the net. If any body part is above the height of the net and this contact is simultaneous, this is an illegal block.
__________________
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
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 24, 2014, 01:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 87
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by FMadera View Post
We don't know this. The OP doesn't say where the blocker's body is in relation to the net; only that the ball is not entirely above the net. If any body part is above the height of the net and this contact is simultaneous, this is an illegal block.
Agreed. The OP doesn't say whether A1's hands are above the height of the net.

1. Based on the OP's description, there is no way that this is a BRA on A1.

2a. If any part of A1's body is above the top of the net, it's a BRB on A1.

2b. If every part of A1's body is below the top of the net, there is no violation...play on. (this is what I believe OP's scenario to be...though it was not completely articulated)

We now agree, right?
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 24, 2014, 08:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,245
I think a very similar question is in the NASO version of this month's (October's) RefMag.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 28, 2014, 10:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 138
this sounds like the famous scenario where we have a back row player legally jousting with an opponent at the net.
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
whats the call justrunnin Basketball 10 Tue Nov 09, 2010 03:00pm
whats the call? RKBUmp Softball 10 Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:09am
Whats the call ? debeau Softball 9 Wed Mar 16, 2005 08:02am
whats the call? wilkey1979 Basketball 7 Sun Feb 29, 2004 08:30pm
whats the call if any? Sideline Ref Basketball 26 Wed Jan 17, 2001 01:35pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:32am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1