Ask the Ref - Rules Questions

[sideout]

I believe the back row player actually can play the ball in front of the 10ft line as long as she does not get above the net. Once she breaks the plane of of the net, it would be a back row attack/block.

[TheGreatLineJudge]

The beloved back-row. It is a great crossroads between the memory and a judgment call. Without knowing the rotation and who the setter is, a valid back-row violation call is not possible. My terminology will include NFHS and USAV terms, but they're more or less interchangeable. There are a handful of actions involving back-row players I will attempt to explain:

 

Back-row attack: This is the action of attacking the ball by a back-row player, while the ball is completely above the height of the net, while in the 10-foot zone. The 10-foot zone includes stepping on the attack line.

 

An attack is any action that directs the ball towards the opponent's court. This could be an overhead pass, a "swat", a setter's dump, an set that heads toward the opponent's side - ANYTHING that makes its way toward the net. Player intention is not considered in making the call (ever, actually).

 

Back-row block: This is the action of contacting an attacked ball (commonly called a block), intentionally or unintentionally, by a back-row player, while the ball is above the height of the net.

 

-Back-row players may ATTEMPT to block the ball. Back-row players, formerly, could not even attempt this action.

-Back-row players may not be part of a successful collective block attempt. Translated: if three players form a wall at the net, and they are formed as FR1-FR2-BR1 from left to right, we will presume they are acting in unison and will jump together. This is a collective block attempt. If the CBA does not successfully block the ball, there is no basis for any rule infraction.

 

However, let us supposed that FR1 happens to successfully block the ball, whether it scores a point immediately or not. Even though BR1 did not contact the ball herself, she was still a part of the attempt. This constitutes a successful CBA, and thus, with a back-row player involved, a back-row block on BR1's part.

 

-The libero may NEVER attempt the block the ball.

-The libero's set may be cause for a back-row attack call. If the libero is completely behind the 10-foot line, there will never be cause for an illegal attack on her.

 

However, if the libero sets the ball with finger action while a foot is on the attack line or she is completely in the 10 foot zone, and that ball is attacked while completely above the height of the net (even if the attacker is a legal front-row player), we have a back-row attack on the libero.

 

Now that your head is spinning, throw this in there too: it is ONLY a finger-action pass (traditional overhead set) that gets the libero in trouble. A forearm bump set or a punch set is not cause for a back-row attack on the libero. The whole point is that the libero is a back-row defensive specialist; they are not supposed to be a front-row, offensive minded player.

 

If there is confusion, I'll be glad to follow-up.

 

P.S. Judgment is always based on where the BALL is, NOT where the player is!

[TNKen]

During club play last year while coaching a group of 18's, and after watching the opposing libro finger set the ball 3x while standing on the attack line, I unloaded on the ref. After the match, he ran to the official who was taking over the court and confronted him over the fact that I was complaining about the libro sets. After the first ref left, I spoke with the oncoming ref, he apologized, and said the ref didn't know the rule.

 

I don't mind missing judgment calls here and there, but a certified ref not knowing the rules is kind of inexcusable.

[PHargis]

During club play last year while coaching a group of 18's, and after watching the opposing libro finger set the ball 3x while standing on the attack line, I unloaded on the ref. After the match, he ran to the official who was taking over the court and confronted him over the fact that I was complaining about the libro sets. After the first ref left, I spoke with the oncoming ref, he apologized, and said the ref didn't know the rule.

 

I don't mind missing judgment calls here and there, but a certified ref not knowing the rules is kind of inexcusable.

While the GLJ is the only one qualified to answer this, What part of the state are you in?

[TheGreatLineJudge]

I don't mind missing judgment calls here and there, but a certified ref not knowing the rules is kind of inexcusable.

 

 

You betcha. Especially on 18s. Just remember: a little kindness goes a long way. Maybe next time, bring a rule book over and try educating the guy. Ask him if he knows. It could be one of those things where he read it but didn't get it. (Might not have bothered reading, either!)

 

Inexcusable? Yes. Worthy of a verbal unload? Perhaps not.

[TNKen]

While the GLJ is the only one qualified to answer this, What part of the state are you in?

 

 

I'm in the Tri-Cities. If I'm not mistaken,the poor officiating happened during the Big South Qualifier in Atlanta.

[PHargis]

I'm in the Tri-Cities. If I'm not mistaken,the poor officiating happened during the Big South Qualifier in Atlanta.

Understanding the area that you are coaching in, you folks teach very well and hope your officiating are more able to handle the calls. Good luck and hope the Tri Cities are not too hard on the rest of the state during the State.