Message sent to r.s.v.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 3rd hit does not clear net, but touched?
- Subject: Re: 3rd hit does not clear net, but touched?
- From: Todd <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: 04 May 1999 09:48:32 -0500
- Newsgroups: rec.sport.volleyball
- Organization: Not likely
- References: <h_oX2.1055$Tr3.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: email@example.com
- Xref: shell-2.enteract.com sent-to-rsv:264
Joe Arkin <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> This brings up an interesting contrast in USAV/FIVB rules
> interpretation regarding a block attempt.
> USAV still has a slight difference to FIVB in this regard which I, for
> one, would like to see changed to align with international rules.
> USAV officials must make a judgement whether an overpassed (or 3rd
> contact) ball is either *attacked* or *blocked* by a player on the
> defensive side of the net. We judge an *attack* if such a player
> takes a swing or shows any offensive motion (setting the ball downward
> or to one side or the other; cobra'ing; camel'ing; etc.). FIVB
> officials do not need to make this judgement. They assume any play on
> such a ball as a *block* and allow an additional contact by the same
> player afterward no matter. If the defensive player traps the ball
> into the top of the net or outright mishits it into the net, that
> player has another opportunity to make the team's 1st contact as the
> intial play on the ball is assumed to be a block (defensive player
> near the net jumps and makes any attempt on the ball).
> I would like to see this interpretation used here (USA) as well.
I share this desire, but from what I've been told, it ain't gonna
happen any time soon. I got this response to my renewed query in
article http://www.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=442095123 USAV
Rules interpreter Tom Blue responded with the following:
On Feb 8, 1999, Tom Blue wrote:
TomB> Thanks for your continuing interest in this issue.
TomB> Nevertheless, nobody in the rule-making bodies feels compelled
TomB> to re-visit this question. The volleyball community at large
TomB> does not seem to feel that changing the present interpretations
TomB> would benefit the game.
TomB> The feeling is that the referees are capable of judging the
TomB> difference between an attack versus a block when the ball is
TomB> about to, or actually does, penetrate the plane of the net.
TomB> More importantly, the players are aware of the difference. A
TomB> change in the interpretation would have many consequences in the
TomB> manner in which the ball is played at the net and most of these
TomB> folks don't think the change would benefit the game.
TomB> Accordingly, there are no proposals at present to change the
TomB> manner in which this action is called.
TomB> Best regards,
TomB> Tom Blue
Todd H. email@example.com
USAV Regional Referee, Great Lakes Region, Palatine, IL
Todd's Volleyball Referee Page http://www.io.com/~tdh/vball/
"So you're a Ref and an engineer? Oh that explains it...."
Search this archive! |
Back to Todd's Ref Page |
Main Index |