Jump to content

Different Region, Different Call


clifford20
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well WEll Well........how long has it been GReatlinejudge??? I can't believe its already the middle of volleyball season and yet this is the first time ive been able to check out what everyone is complaining about :)

 

I had a question about something kinda off the subject, but not too much.......

 

We have ordered a libero jersey and i have aquestion about the color.......we have the black russell jersey with white going down the side and orange and white writing on the front with white numbers........would orange be enough of a contrasting color to be ok as the jersey????

 

 

I look forward to getting on here as much as possible and catching up on all the great topics and finding out how games went, when i barely have the time to get to my own!!!!

 

Big AC/Clinton/Oak Ridge Playday coming up.......i hope everyone is ready for some surprises!!!!!

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

To clarify again on first-ball-over contact, multiple contacts are ok, PROVIDED it is one attempt to play the ball. Overhead set on first ball and there is a bang-bang left hand to right hand contact is ok. If the ball bounces off her arm and she then swings to hit it over, you would have an illegal two contacts. As always, prolonged contact is never legal.

 

What part of the state are you from?

825749677[/snapback]

 

I'm from Middle-ish TN, over and under the hill......

 

Back to open hand reception, legal multiple contacts are quick bang - bang, not squish - spin - sluch. Though I am a little pensive about the roll off the finger tips - usually continuing in the direction of the back court...............

 

Open hand digs have never been illegal, but the multiple contact rule has seemed to have really grayed the perception of legal contact. I liked the multiple contact rule on bumps - don't particularly like it applied to open hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to open hand reception, legal multiple contacts are quick bang - bang, not squish - spin - sluch.  Though I am a little pensive about the roll off the finger tips - usually continuing in the direction of the back court...............

 

Open hand digs have never been illegal, but the multiple contact rule has seemed to have really grayed the perception of legal contact.  I liked the multiple contact rule on bumps - don't particularly like it applied to open hands.

825755610[/snapback]

 

I think the first-ball-over multi rule was implemented to account for the prevalence of overhead setting on the first contact and the strength of today's hitters, among other reasons. Rolling off the fingertips is still prolonged contact, regardless of situation, but this isn't enforced nearly enough!

Edited by TheGreatLineJudge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another one of those with no email address. Email me if you get a chance.

 

I think the first-ball-over multi rule was implemented to account for the prevalence of overhead setting on the first contact and the strength of today's hitters, among other reasons. Rolling off the fingertips would be prolonged contact in my view.

825755615[/snapback]

 

I'll e-mail you sometime, but in the interest of starting a debate......

 

The Multiple contact rule was first applied to only hard hit balls - such as spikes - as long as finger action was not used. This was an attempt to make play longer and thus more dramatic. Well it did not take long to figure out that "hard hit" left a lot to interpretation, and in the on going effort to minimize judgements :thumb: the ref has to make - "hard hit" was changed to "first ball over" quickly changing to "first team pass" - since blocks don't count as one of the three team hits. I think all of this happened before it came down to NFHS. When NFHS first adopted it they had some mutterings about finger action that no one understood, so finally they just took it out.

 

Interesting side note - on another forum I used to read, while discussing (chidding) the US on why they do so poorly internationally at the game they invented - it was put forth that it was probably due to the US's propensity to open hand service recieve to many balls and be called for poor exicution (prolong contact) by the international refs that have a rather high standard.

 

That is a couple of years old. Perhaps the standard has been lowered so we will be more competative?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll e-mail you sometime, but in the interest of starting a debate......

 

The Multiple contact rule was first applied to only hard hit balls - such as spikes - as long as finger action was not used.  This was an attempt to make play longer and thus more dramatic.  Well it did not take long to figure out that "hard hit" left a lot to interpretation, and in the on going effort to minimize judgements  :thumb: the ref has to make - "hard hit" was changed to "first ball over" quickly changing to "first team pass" - since blocks don't count as one of the three team hits.  I think all of this happened before it came down to NFHS.  When NFHS first adopted it they had some mutterings about finger action that no one understood, so finally they just took it out.

 

Interesting side note - on another forum I used to read, while discussing (chidding) the US on why they do so poorly internationally at the game they invented -  it was put forth that it was probably due to the US's propensity to open hand service recieve to many balls and be called for poor exicution (prolong contact) by the international refs that have a rather high standard.

 

That is a couple of years old.  Perhaps the standard has been lowered so we will be more competative?

825755627[/snapback]

 

 

I think the MC rule change has been beneficial at the high school level. I'm glad they took the finger action wording out, because if the first ball results in a finger-action set, it shouldn't be penalized (and allow a double on a bump on the same first contact to go unpunished!). Instead of making a bunch of conditions that are left to wide open interpretation, the current wording is much better. Prolonged contact is still a judgment call, albeit considerably less open than the term "hard hit". "Hard hit" could be the same thing at three different matches- it's all about what you're used to, if a team was hitting harder than another one day, etc. Bottom line is that rules should leave as little as possible up to an official to decide at their own leisure what is or isn't a rules violation. This is not to say judgment calls should be removed, for ball handling would jump head-first right out the window. Wording should always be concise and clear in meaning and spell out what it means.

 

Ultimately, I believe NFHS rules were relaxed to fall more in line with collegiate (and thus, FIVB) rules. I'm still of the opinion that high school will play by straight NCAA rules eventually. Massachusetts does play by NCAA rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TheGreatLineJudge' date='Sep 19 2005 - 12:00 AM'

Ultimately, I believe NFHS rules were relaxed to fall more in line with collegiate (and thus, FIVB) rules. I'm still of the opinion that high school will play by straight NCAA rules eventually. Massachusetts does play by NCAA rules.

 

 

Hear, hear! One day, one rule set! :thumb: It will be FIVB.

 

 

TGLG: "Rolling off the fingertips is still prolonged contact, regardless of situation, but this isn't enforced nearly enough!"

 

What rule set are you thinking about. The NFHS case book says that any ball rolling off the fingertips is probably legal. Not even 'maybe' or 'could be', but probably.......no diagram of a fingertip was included :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great point oldsetter!

We have such an unhelpful tradition, even among the good officials, of talking about what techniques are or could be illegal. Not only are the rulebooks almost totally devoid of technique comments, the intent of the rules seems to be clearly and simply to not let a player gain too much control over the ball by holding on too long or by changing direction (or doubling after the first).

 

I don't read in any intent that says "And, set it how I told you to!" or "And, how dare you set it with one hand?!" or "You can't dig a ball with an open palm, they didn't used to do that and it makes a sound for crying out loud. Sound has got to be illegal!" or "Hey, that hit your shoulder, I'm gonna call that illegal!"

 

VB Officiating should stay away from style infractions being blown, this is not a dog show. Let the kids play the darn game ..and when a player holds on long enough to give her an unfair advantage then you'll "know it" and you blow those. Same guideline for doubles. With a two hand technique (in literal terms) NO contact is perfectly "simultanious" ..so, it's all a matter of degree. Many sets come in with a twitch and leave pretty even ..why stop the game the kids are playing to blow that??? When there is a double that gives her an unfair advantage then you'll know it, you don't even have to "look for it". My opinion- a slight twitch does NOT give you an advantage. So, if you feel the need to "look for" a slight twitch so you can stop kids from having fun then go be an accountant, not an official.

 

Last night's final at the Tandem was a good case for doubles. B.wood's setter has incredibly great and disciplined form ..but every now and then there is a slight twitch of the ball as it comes in. No big deal. GPS's setters are good but they twitch it to a slightly greater degree and twitch it more often. Again, no big deal. Neither tm gained ANY advantage on the balls they did not receive or realease "perfectly". So, let the game be played and decided by factors other than style interpretations or half inch movements of a ball.

 

The game is meant to be played by kids, not officiated by adults. Thanks for reminding us about the book and intent oldsetter.

 

As another example of how wrapped up we can get with declaring things to be illegal- I was at a JV match where one team had two #35's and two #31's playing in the same game! Neither coach was uptight, the official negotiated it to work, the scorekeepers worked it out and 24 kids got to play volleyball. Big rule infractions, yes, BUT the world is still spinning and this is a reminder that it's about kids getting to play, not us showing off on how much we can declare illegal.

Edited by ComPassion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The officiating just needs to be standardized. All refs in the state of TN need to attend a clinic and soon. Probably too late for 05, but hopefully before 06. I agree with a lot of the comments in this thread, but players are simply confused. Some outcomes of games are impacted by this and there needs to be a stop to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The officiating just needs to be standardized. All refs in the state of TN need to attend a clinic and soon. Probably too late for 05, but hopefully before 06. I agree with a lot of the comments in this thread, but players are simply confused. Some outcomes of games are impacted by this and there needs to be a stop to it.

 

When I was playing, I always though the officiating was too tight on my side of the net and too loose on the other! ;)

 

Here's part of the problem:

 

1) This is the only HS sport in TN that I know of that has only one official working the game. The home team keeps score, you track your own libero and parents (at best, sometimes kids) call lines. Does anyone know how many states don’t use umpires?

 

2) There is not a long line of knowledgeable people just aching to become referees. There is not even a line of unknowledgeable people.

 

3) It would not hurt a few coaches to bone up on the rules.

 

4) As far as standards go, who’s do you want to follow? Call everything? Call nothing? No doubles on Fridays? Free lifts on Wednesday? Or my fav’ – No over-the–net-violations if that cranking spike really looks cool.

 

Long term we need to stick together to promote the sport. I don’t have any answers, but I do think that a real measure of our success is how many players we send to the next level. To a recruiter or college coach, it really does not mater what your school’s win/lose record is or how well her games were officiated. He is looking at her skills – bump, set, spike, stay out of the net, transition from offense to defense, team player, good attitude, coach-able,…yada, yada, yada, (Or so I am guessing)!

 

I want to see some Tennessee girls on the US Olympic team, playing for Stanford………..say, who is tracking our girls anyway. How do we measure up to the rest of the US?

 

I need to cut back on the coffee. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) This is the only HS sport in TN that I know of that has only one official working the game. The home team keeps score, you track your own libero and parents (at best, sometimes kids) call lines. Does anyone know how many states don’t use umpires?

 

Very few. TN is one of a handful with only one official.

 

2) There is not a long line of knowledgeable people just aching to become referees. There is not even a line of unknowledgeable people.

 

Got that right. We are always happy to find more people who are capable of learning the game. We LOVE picking up former players.

 

3) It would not hurt a few coaches to bone up on the rules.

 

Some coaches don't know anything, others try to talk circles around an official. In either case, solid knowledge of (and knowing how to apply) the rules never hurts.

 

4) As far as standards go, who’s do you want to follow? Call everything? Call nothing? No doubles on Fridays? Free lifts on Wednesday? Or my fav’ – No over-the–net-violations if that cranking spike really looks cool.

 

Don't even know where to start on this one. West TN teams I've seen this year complain- not that Nashville is too tight, but that nothing gets called out in Memphis/Jackson area. East TN teams gripe, but take it. Nashville just calls it as we see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Read this on an interview with the coach. University of Wisconsin. Entire interview

 

Bob Steffen: Why don't volleyball referees have the announcer explain controversial calls. By that I mean, at times, there is a stop in the action, the referee talks with both coaches, floor huddling takes place, and then play resumes without any loudspeaker annoucement as to what rule infraction took place.

 

Pete Waite: That's a good point, I don't even understand sometimes! Maybe we should have them wired like they do for football so fans can understand it more. The reason they don't explain it is that they probably prefer fans don't understand it so much. That's probably why you don't see it explained at pro baseball games either.

 

 

That is an anti-official coach. I find that it's the opposite case. Officials WANT fans to understand and know the rules. It helps them appreciate the job we do and to appreciate the game more. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read this on an interview with the coach. University of Wisconsin. Entire interview

 

Bob Steffen: Why don't volleyball referees have the announcer explain controversial calls. By that I mean, at times, there is a stop in the action, the referee talks with both coaches, floor huddling takes place, and then play resumes without any loudspeaker annoucement as to what rule infraction took place.

 

Pete Waite: That's a good point, I don't even understand sometimes! Maybe we should have them wired like they do for football so fans can understand it more. The reason they don't explain it is that they probably prefer fans don't understand it so much. That's probably why you don't see it explained at pro baseball games either.

 

 

That is an anti-official coach. I find that it's the opposite case. Officials WANT fans to understand and know the rules. It helps them appreciate the job we do and to appreciate the game more. :lol:

My understanding is that it is discouraged for PA announcers to explain official's calls because:

1. on controversial calls 1/3 of the people will boo anyway after the interpretation, it just makes them madder

2. most PA announcers don't know enough to explain

3. You can explain the correct calls but what do you do when trying to announce a misinterp. by the official?? For example, I have made the following 2 announcements:

"Suzie Smith, with her 3rd back row attack for a kill" (illegal b.row setter attacks)

"Back row block called on the front row blocker"

...neither went over too well with the official :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

Announcements


  • Recent Posts

    • McKenzie had no trouble with Huntingdon.  
    • Has BA landed any cornfed cowboys to block up front?
    • Yea I agree I will say tho I was a big “ v “ fan if an  opening ever did happen I think it would’ve been good to see him have a shot coming from a power house like Oakland. I’m sure he’s learned a lot from Kevin.  I bet he would bring a really good offense scheme IMO But after all this I just dunno anymore.  Whatever happens with the rumors an such if it did come to and opening I think this messes it all up.  The board members dreams are slowly slipping away now. I haven’t lived there for awhile I just hear what I hear, but my question is would there be any good potential candidates?? That’s why I don’t understand why people want b s out so bad who else could do any better ?? IMO there’s nothing attractive about it? As I stated earlier I went to the last game last year and taking a leak in a porta Potty is pretty sad and still nothing being done they say .. 
    • I have a sophomore that can do 177 (preferred) or 192. Sent you an email.
    • speaking of board members how can a man get arrested 12 days ago and still be head coaching a team in TC school system? looks like your right about the tc board members. I bet it would be different if they had a kid on the team 
×
  • Create New...