|
|
Post by texaggie on Jul 5, 2012 14:49:41 GMT -5
Hi All.
I just spent about 30 minutes reading through the applicable sections of the USAV rulebook (I have a pdf saved on my computer). I still cannot figure out the answer to this question:
If at the moment of service, a player other than the server has his/her foot touching the court boundary line but not extending over or outside of the line, is it a violation or a legal serve? My understanding was that you cannot even touch the line, but I was instructed by a certified USAV official that you may touch the line as long as you do not cross it. If anyone knows the answer to this and can point me to the wording which describes this situation within the rulebook I would greatly appreciate it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2012 14:56:41 GMT -5
Has to be over the line. They can touch the line since it is "in."
Can't find the rule (why not?), although 27.2.1.4 gives line judges the right to call the fault.
|
|
|
|
Post by Not Me on Jul 5, 2012 14:58:21 GMT -5
the rulebook is not going to address this situation specifically.
the line is in. therefore a player standing on the line is still in play.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jul 5, 2012 15:04:06 GMT -5
Has to be over the line. They can touch the line since it is "in." Correct, the line is part of the "Court", which is why it's a fault if you touch the line during a service, or back row attack (above the plane of the net). |
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Jul 5, 2012 15:33:21 GMT -5
Had a big argument with a PAVO-certified ref about this at a tournament once. Being on the line is IN. Of course, once I had gotten backup on this from the R2, R1 suddenly "remembered" that the foot was in fact over the line anyway.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2012 15:41:26 GMT -5
There's no consistency anyhow. How come only part of the ball has to be in but all of the foot has to be?
I've long advocated abolishing all volleyball lines and going to a two-foot brick wall.
(And by "long," I mean 3:41 PM 7/5/2012.)
|
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 5, 2012 16:33:53 GMT -5
Had a big argument with a PAVO-certified ref about this at a tournament once. Being on the line is IN. Of course, once I had gotten backup on this from the R2, R1 suddenly "remembered" that the foot was in fact over the line anyway. Aren't people just so special? |
|
|
|
Post by NebraskaVBfan93 on Jul 5, 2012 17:28:21 GMT -5
There's no consistency anyhow. How come only part of the ball has to be in but all of the foot has to be? I've long advocated abolishing all volleyball lines and going to a two-foot brick wall. (And by "long," I mean 3:41 PM 7/5/2012.) We played a game in college called WALLYBALL. It was played with net set up on a racquetball court. Not one line issue came up. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 5, 2012 17:47:54 GMT -5
There's no consistency anyhow. How come only part of the ball has to be in but all of the foot has to be? I've long advocated abolishing all volleyball lines and going to a two-foot brick wall. (And by "long," I mean 3:41 PM 7/5/2012.) We played a game in college called WALLYBALL. It was played with net set up on a racquetball court. Not one line issue came up. The only line in wallyball tore up my ankle. Some idiot from the other team put his foot down on my side of the net underneath my foot and I had to wear a brace on my ankle for years. |
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jul 5, 2012 20:58:55 GMT -5
Most NCAA and pro basketball courts have sharp lines defining what is inbounds or out of bounds, and may have that marking the key. They typically do that with a solid color for out of bounds with inbounds in a natural hardwood color. There's no mistaking that there's one edge.
However, in BB there are any number of different ways lines are treated. If inbounds is marked with a line, stepping on the line is out of bounds. Then there's the center line, which is similar to the center line in VB. If lines are used to mark the key, the outside edge is the boundary.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jul 5, 2012 23:10:49 GMT -5
There's no consistency anyhow. How come only part of the ball has to be in but all of the foot has to be? ? Only part of the foot has to be out. Any slightest bit in contact outside the line would technically be a fault. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2012 23:43:28 GMT -5
That's what I said.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jul 6, 2012 6:56:55 GMT -5
Sorry...was reading while half asleep, for some reason I saw an "out" at the end of your sentence. |
|
|
|
Post by karellen on Jul 6, 2012 9:20:53 GMT -5
When I was officiating many years ago, some portion of the foot of the non-server had to be outside teh court for it to be a fault. As an official, I would then call this as an overlap and make the same circular motion with my hand. The "up" official would watch the serving team for this violation, and the "down" official would watch the receiving team (obviously).
In all my years playing, coaching and officiating I have seen this call made maybe twice and I called one of them. Backrow player was completely outside the court by 2 - 3 inches when teammate served - was not even close. Then he proceeded to get mad at me. Apparently it was my fault he did not know where the court was.
|
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jul 6, 2012 10:20:54 GMT -5
I've never seen a fault called for a teammate being outside the boundaries, but I have seen a service fault called when a teammate was on the center line during the serve. That's a case where from either side stepping on the line is a fault.
I guess that's a convenience in the way the lines are drawn. With my basketball example, there's the boundaries marked by an edge of paint where one doesn't really need to worry about whether the inside or outside edge is the boundary since the boundary is obvious. However, I couldn't really see any practical means to mark something like a center line that way. In volleyball, the center line becomes something more like a neutral area rather than a boundary.
|
|
