Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2021 21:01:38 GMT -5
yikes read the thread and talk about deflection bringing up the Louisville-Texas game LOL I wasn't deflecting. shhhhhh tried to argue that Kentucky outhit Washington therefore them winning the match wasn't the refs fault. I never said it WAS the refs fault, merely pointed out that hitting for a higher percentage doesn't always lead to winning. That's not deflecting, it's called proving someone wrong with evidence. That isn’t what you did lmao.
|
|
|
Post by VolleyballFella on Apr 22, 2021 21:03:35 GMT -5
Everyone keeps talking about ONE CALL in that 3rd set. Am I wrong that UK wasn't faulted on MORE than one call? Wasn't that a pretty obvious double over the net by Lilley toward the end of the 3rd set? Didn't I see AT LEAST one foot fault on UK (if not 2)?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 22, 2021 21:04:18 GMT -5
I get the anger about the missed call, but this a problem of procedure and process rather than bad officiating. R1 us trained to watch the top of the net during the attack and the immediately leave the net and find the dig, so there is no way for R1 to make this call. R2 is a little more on the hook, but the process they are trained on is top of the net during the attack, then bottom. Of the net and center line. It is very unusual for a blocker to net at the Top as late as she did, that is why the training is to focus on the bottom and the center line after the attackers hand clears the net. The next obvious question is why can't they watch it all? The answer is because reffing is different than watching a match. You need to constantly shift you focus to get to you next specific area of responsibility. Very different than watching the whole court. And this is why the challenge system should be fixed.
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Apr 22, 2021 21:05:10 GMT -5
I think Washington was lucky to come back and win the 2nd set. Kentucky should have won 3-0 but took their foot off the gas. They cannot afford to do that against Wisconsin or Texas. I agree with this. Washington upped the pressure and Kentucky folded for the second half of the 2nd set and much of the 3rd. Wisconsin and Texas has too many weapons too have Kentucky get into that much of negative pattern. I have to say after watching Washington early in the season when they had some issues and then at the mid point of the season when they started to get on their roll to today... I think they are a good team, but not a great team and what they accomplished and then all the 5 setters they won in the tournament to get to the Final 4... I now feel like Keegan Cook did a fabulous job coaching this year and he could have easily been coach of the year.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Apr 22, 2021 21:05:10 GMT -5
Just have some empathy for a fanbase that got royally screwed there and enjoy playing in the finals. For the fans that talked all that sh*t about Minnesota’s loss to Pitt... lol yea no Empathy. PAC fans are just such victims LOL right? I'm supposed to be empathetic as a fan of a team that gets zero respect on this forum, just made their first National Championship, yet the entire match thread is marred with complaints about a missed call.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 30,319
|
Post by trojansc on Apr 22, 2021 21:06:39 GMT -5
I get the anger about the missed call, but this a problem of procedure and process rather than bad officiating. R1 us trained to watch the top of the net during the attack and the immediately leave the net and find the dig, so there is no way for R1 to make this call. R2 is a little more on the hook, but the process they are trained on is top of the net during the attack, then bottom. Of the net and center line. It is very unusual for a blocker to net at the Top as late as she did, that is why the training is to focus on the bottom and the center line after the attackers hand clears the net. The next obvious question is why can't they watch it all? The answer is because reffing is different than watching a match. You need to constantly shift you focus to get to you next specific area of responsibility. Very different than watching the whole court. Is there anyway for the line judges to get involved in a call without being summoned by R1? I'd imagine the linejudge on the UW side could have seen it. Idk, R2's have definitely caught plenty of nets where the ball is further past the net than the instance in question.
|
|
|
Post by VB48 on Apr 22, 2021 21:06:47 GMT -5
a missed call at 1-0 could have just as big of an impact on the game as a missed call at 22-20. You clearly do not understand percentages or game theory. A missed call at 1-0 is 1/24 of the points needed to win at that point in the set. When a match is 22-20, it is the same thing as 2-0 in a set to 5. 1 point is 1/3 of the points needed to win the set for the team at 2. They are not even close to worth the same.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 22, 2021 21:07:15 GMT -5
I get the anger about the missed call, but this a problem of procedure and process rather than bad officiating. R1 us trained to watch the top of the net during the attack and the immediately leave the net and find the dig, so there is no way for R1 to make this call. R2 is a little more on the hook, but the process they are trained on is top of the net during the attack, then bottom. Of the net and center line. It is very unusual for a blocker to net at the Top as late as she did, that is why the training is to focus on the bottom and the center line after the attackers hand clears the net. The next obvious question is why can't they watch it all? The answer is because reffing is different than watching a match. You need to constantly shift you focus to get to you next specific area of responsibility. Very different than watching the whole court. Is there anyway for the line judges to get involved in a call without being summoned by R1? I'd imagine the linejudge on the UW side could have seen it. Idk, R2's have definitely caught plenty of nets where the ball is further past the net than the instance in question. Line judges are definitely not supposed to be looking for net calls.
|
|
|
Post by houstonbear15 on Apr 22, 2021 21:07:38 GMT -5
I would argue that a missed called at 22-20 will always have a bigger impact than at 1-0. You have the entire set to recover from a missed call at 1-0. Not very much room to do so later in the match. Doesn't matter. Volleyball is a consequential game. If that 1-0 call affects you more than that call at 22-20, it will have a bigger impact. Thing is, we'll never know. If a 1-0 missed call affects a team for an entire set, then they have some deeper issues to address. While you can’t always control the situation, you can control how you respond to it.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Apr 22, 2021 21:08:01 GMT -5
For the fans that talked all that sh*t about Minnesota’s loss to Pitt... lol yea no Empathy. PAC fans are just such victims LOL right? I'm supposed to be empathetic as a fan of a team that gets zero respect on this forum, just made their first National Championship, yet the entire match thread is marred with complaints about a missed call. "I won't recognize that someone else was treated unfairly because I want to feel like my accomplishments are so special and recognizing that unfairness could, obliquely, take away from that" - Everyone from the Midwest and South (Trumpistan)
|
|
|
Post by donut on Apr 22, 2021 21:09:55 GMT -5
Doesn't matter. Volleyball is a consequential game. If that 1-0 call affects you more than that call at 22-20, it will have a bigger impact. Thing is, we'll never know. If a 1-0 missed call affects a team for an entire set, then they have some deeper issues to address. While you can’t always control the situation, you can control how you respond to it. Maybe it doesn't affect them for an entire set. Maybe it affects them for 3 points, they go down 3-0, and then lose the set 25-23. That 1 point all of a sudden becomes huge.
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Apr 22, 2021 21:10:13 GMT -5
OK, the real match just started... see ya!
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 22, 2021 21:11:31 GMT -5
While you can’t always control the situation, you can control how you respond to it. I guess I have to call this out. The purpose of the challenge system is to get the calls right. It failed today, and not just because we didn't have fast cameras or because the plays were so ambiguous. It failed because the *system* *is* *stupid*. Everybody knows it's stupid not to be able to keep challenges you win. So why does the NCAA insist on this for WVB?
|
|
|
Post by timduckforlife on Apr 22, 2021 21:13:39 GMT -5
Is there anyway for the line judges to get involved in a call without being summoned by R1? I'd imagine the linejudge on the UW side could have seen it. Idk, R2's have definitely caught plenty of nets where the ball is further past the net than the instance in question. Line judges are definitely not supposed to be looking for net calls. That's a true thing the way the jobs are used. That said, I wouldn't be against a more team oriented ref crew. There are definitely things linejudges could help with. Net calls being one of them. I was a line judge in high school state, and I definitely saw nets that were missed. A couple of fundamental things that can change is the way linejudges are utilized. 1, allow them to have a say in calls like that, and if necessary, approach the r1 and give input. 2, back them off the line just a little because the hardest call to make is that corner hot where they are and they're almost literally watching the top of the volleyball and it's next to impossible to see where it touches the ground.
|
|
|
Post by alhorford90 on Apr 22, 2021 21:13:44 GMT -5
Congrats to Kentucky.
|
|