|
Post by lonewolf on Jul 27, 2010 11:01:47 GMT -5
Height matters more for the middle back digger than a crosscourt digger because middle back plays significantly more balls that come off the top of the block. In college volleyball smaller liberos tend to play angle. As pointed out by others height does make a difference in passing. Taller players with long levers are more comfortable drop stepping while smaller players tend to begin deeper and rely on their quickness to move forward. I like the word "tend" as more than a few teams play their libero in middle back. Also, dependent on defensive systems, some left backs end up playing the deep cross.
|
|
|
Post by pogoball on Jul 27, 2010 11:20:39 GMT -5
And I will repeat again that an up ref cannot judge whether a ball is completely above the height of the net when a player is behind the 3 meter line. What I am saying is that SINCE this is an impossible call, they should follow the spirit of the rule. Agree - very hard to tell the height of the ball from behind the 3 meter line. Trajectory of the ball would be a better determination. A flat ball, not going to call that. A ball hit down with some force and an approach, okay, call it. ANY DOUBT at all, don't call it. Agree with this. Actually, referees should also watch warm-ups to see whether this might be an issue with the liberos for each team. I'm not as familiar with this issue at the college level. I'm guessing that many to most college liberos can get above the net with a full approach, so it is a more difficult call. At the juniors level, it is usually NOT a violation because most liberos simply can't get above the net.
|
|
|
Post by Pirate VB Fan on Jul 27, 2010 11:40:57 GMT -5
Agree - very hard to tell the height of the ball from behind the 3 meter line. Trajectory of the ball would be a better determination. A flat ball, not going to call that. A ball hit down with some force and an approach, okay, call it. ANY DOUBT at all, don't call it. Agree with this. Actually, referees should also watch warm-ups to see whether this might be an issue with the liberos for each team. I'm not as familiar with this issue at the college level. I'm guessing that many to most college liberos can get above the net with a full approach, so it is a more difficult call. At the juniors level, it is usually NOT a violation because most liberos simply can't get above the net. Yes, but the whole point of this thread is we are talking about TALL liberos. You put a 6' libero back there and she will be above the height of the net at full extension, much less if she jumps.
|
|
|
Post by david on Jul 27, 2010 16:30:10 GMT -5
Why would you set an attacking 6' libero in the back row when you can set an ostensibly better hitter out of the back row- because your passers/setters aren't any good?
Holthus has played some libero for USAV, I can't think of any other liberos I'd want swinging back there, even if there wasn't a rule.
Get out of the way.
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jul 27, 2010 16:46:42 GMT -5
Why would you set an attacking 6' libero in the back row when you can set an ostensibly better hitter out of the back row- because your passers/setters aren't any good? Holthus has played some libero for USAV, I can't think of any other liberos I'd want swinging back there, even if there wasn't a rule. Get out of the way. There are a few that could score if they were wearing the right colored jersey over the last couple years...but they are definitely in the minority. Of course it's always best when the setter sets the ball way out to the libero near the left pin...(besides being ineffective) if you can set that...you can set the left front. Sorry again, bit of a vent...not being able to strangle setters for this is why I have to pluck white hairs.
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Jul 27, 2010 17:04:43 GMT -5
Referring to the "stout" libero azvb saw at a tournament, there are many through the lower levels of club volleyball (emerald and forest level and lower) that volleytalkers rarely see. Girls who have defensive skills but not picturesque bods. And with mediocre offense they can take over a match.
|
|
|
Post by tex on Jul 28, 2010 8:01:59 GMT -5
I used to think height in the back row was overrated. But watching high level volleyball there are so many hits off the top of the block at velocity that go shooting over the back row. Taller players have a better chance of reaching up and keeping the ball in play on numerous occasions. As to side to side, not sure longer reach outweighs reflexes and the ability to sky the ball. I'm going to agree here (everything else being equal between the players)...taller is better. -Watching high level volleyball...all of those big bodies make the back court look very small for hitters to find an opening (and seams smaller in SR) -Taller players can move further into the court and still defend the line/high shots with their hands (SR also). -Taller players tend to have longer arms: which equals bigger platform to play balls in front and to the sides. -Taller players tend to have bigger hands (watch players with small hands dig/pass the ball with their hands, and it becomes evident that many of the shorter liberos struggle with using their hands in S/R due to not enough surface area to control the ball) Sounds logical but is so wrong in so many ways in the real world of indoor volleyball.
|
|
|
Post by rbball02 on Jul 28, 2010 8:14:18 GMT -5
thats only because many taller players dont focus on passing. If a 6 foot outside has some injury to her shoulder that prevents her from playing front row but she decides to focus on passing and defense her size and all of the things Lonewolf mentioned would definetly assist her
|
|
heidi
Sophomore
Posts: 180
|
Post by heidi on Jul 28, 2010 8:17:06 GMT -5
I am thinking those big hands and long reach that Lonewolf spoke of do not really mean much if the player doesn't have the footwork to get in position to pass the ball proficiently. Playing good defense is not just a matter of sticking out a big hand or a long arm to tap the ball into the air. Too many times I have seen taller players think they are in position with their platform for a pass only to shank it wildly. And, there is nothing like a libero with quick feet to chase down an off court dig--the big girls just can't get their bodies moving quick enough. So, good hands and quickness are what I think makes a good libero--height has little to do with it.
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jul 28, 2010 9:12:37 GMT -5
I'm going to agree here (everything else being equal between the players)...taller is better. -Watching high level volleyball...all of those big bodies make the back court look very small for hitters to find an opening (and seams smaller in SR) -Taller players can move further into the court and still defend the line/high shots with their hands (SR also). -Taller players tend to have longer arms: which equals bigger platform to play balls in front and to the sides. -Taller players tend to have bigger hands (watch players with small hands dig/pass the ball with their hands, and it becomes evident that many of the shorter liberos struggle with using their hands in S/R due to not enough surface area to control the ball) Sounds logical but is so wrong in so many ways in the real world of indoor volleyball. And what is illogical in my post?
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jul 28, 2010 9:34:39 GMT -5
I am thinking those big hands and long reach that Lonewolf spoke of do not really mean much if the player doesn't have the footwork to get in position to pass the ball proficiently. Playing good defense is not just a matter of sticking out a big hand or a long arm to tap the ball into the air. Too many times I have seen taller players think they are in position with their platform for a pass only to shank it wildly. And, there is nothing like a libero with quick feet to chase down an off court dig--the big girls just can't get their bodies moving quick enough. So, good hands and quickness are what I think makes a good libero--height has little to do with it. Agreed on most points...which is why I said "everything else being equal between the players". Just as with the whole setter argument on the other thread, being shorter doesn't mean a player is going to have better footwork, be in better position, or have faster feet than someone that is taller than them. (E.g. Jordan Larson being Big 12 defensive player of the year) And as you said height does not make a great libero...but, neither do quickness, reading, platform control, etc. by themselves. It's the combination of the attributes that makes a libero successful.
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Jul 28, 2010 10:52:13 GMT -5
This thread is retarded.
|
|
|
Post by planetasia01 on Jul 29, 2010 0:42:19 GMT -5
Having Liberos attacking in system is retarded.
|
|
|
Post by scoremode on Jul 29, 2010 8:01:55 GMT -5
It depends. In the men's pro league you would want a tall setter to block. The hitter will always have an advantage or can hit over a small setter in the mens game.
The women's game is a little different. As long as they can put up a solid block they will be able to touch or channel the ball to a defense of player. In the top 20 D-1 schools a setter height may matter, after height it will not matter. That's why every on need to be able to set.
If you have a 5' 4 setter and your running a 5 - 1, wouldn't it be nice to rotate your 6 '3 middle blocker in that can set for 3 rotation for your tiny setter in the front row.
A Libero's height makes no difference. If you can flat out pick up balls. read and making plays, height doesn't matter.
Craig Hiddensportsrecruit.com
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2010 10:45:06 GMT -5
And a tall setter does not matter if she can't set as well, dig as well and just overall run a team as well as a shorter one. An dominant block from your setter is nice, but not essential.
|
|