|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 14, 2021 15:55:37 GMT -5
19-16 UW. TO NW after a block on TTA by Robinson after a tight OOS set.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 14, 2021 15:56:11 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm using the one off the UW website. It's correct. Now I understand what people are talking about. |
|
|
|
Post by wibadgervbfan on Nov 14, 2021 16:00:46 GMT -5
Badgers close it out 25-20 on a Northwestern service error.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 14, 2021 16:02:51 GMT -5
Well. It took 3 match points for no good reason, but NW serves into the net.
The kids, Robinson, Orzol and Demps played a big role today. NW played well.
|
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Nov 14, 2021 16:43:55 GMT -5
The backrow attack from Demps felt much more "judicious" and unforced than it was Friday night.
Early on TTA was much less error-prone than I'm used to seeing - credit to her - and that was maybe the biggest factor to the first set loss. UW wasn't great, but NW was really good. Things looked more 'normal' to me after that; credit to NW for putting up such a battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by bucky415 on Nov 14, 2021 16:47:10 GMT -5
Good to be back in the win column. I hope the Badgers can play well on a more consistent basis down the stretch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Nov 14, 2021 17:16:23 GMT -5
This was a confidence builder for Demps in her new role.
|
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Nov 14, 2021 17:25:49 GMT -5
This was a confidence builder for Demps in her new role. The guy who sits next to me pointed out that Demps looks more comfortable hitting from the back, maybe because of the longer approach/runup. Maybe she needs to start her front line approach farther back, like Samedy often does. |
|
goopy
High School
Posts: 9 
|
Post by goopy on Nov 14, 2021 20:13:31 GMT -5
anyone able to offer up a clue as to why Dana Rettke was crying at the end of the match during Varsity?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Nov 14, 2021 20:17:02 GMT -5
She's got a little kid pal who adores her. Maybe she did something super sweet?
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 14, 2021 20:27:06 GMT -5
This was a confidence builder for Demps in her new role. The guy who sits next to me pointed out that Demps looks more comfortable hitting from the back, maybe because of the longer approach/runup. Maybe she needs to start her front line approach farther back, like Samedy often does. Yes. It almost looks like they have been treating the BR attack as a last second bail out option, when in actuality it needs to be a fixed part of the offense, as with Samedy and Newton and Sun and Kubik etc. That means a proper approach on attack. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 14, 2021 20:28:11 GMT -5
anyone able to offer up a clue as to why Dana Rettke was crying at the end of the match during Varsity? I did not notice this watching from home. |
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Nov 14, 2021 21:21:13 GMT -5
So I need some help from somebody who knows the rules better than I do (that isn't very hard):
The LONG delay during the third set was caused by a ball bumped by a Northwestern DS very close to and above the net. Rettke is about to jump to play it as on overpass when the NW setter, who is back row at the time, jums up and pulls it back, and the point continues. Sheffield reacts, holding his hand up while looking at the up ref and walking towards the down ref, all while the play continues. The challenge was ultimately announced as a "touch/no touch" but much of the delay was the play of that ball at/above the net.
So my question is when does the NW setter become guilty of a backrow attack etc? Live in the Field House, I thought the ball had travelled across and was fully on the Wisconsin side of the net, but the video shows it was still directly above the net, 50-50 or so on each side. So was Sheffield thinking the same as me, and wanted "goaltending", or was something that should have been an illegal backrow call, etc?
the play is at the 1:41 point of the BTNPlus video.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingsley on Nov 14, 2021 21:37:17 GMT -5
So I need some help from somebody who knows the rules better than I do (that isn't very hard): The LONG delay during the third set was caused by a ball bumped by a Northwestern DS very close to and above the net. Rettke is about to jump to play it as on overpass when the NW setter, who is back row at the time, jums up and pulls it back, and the point continues. Sheffield reacts, holding his hand up while looking at the up ref and walking towards the down ref, all while the play continues. The challenge was ultimately announced as a "touch/no touch" but much of the delay was the play of that ball at/above the net. So my question is when does the NW setter become guilty of a backrow attack etc? Live in the Field House, I thought the ball had travelled across and was fully on the Wisconsin side of the net, but the video shows it was still directly above the net, 50-50 or so on each side. So was Sheffield thinking the same as me, and wanted "goaltending", or was something that should have been an illegal backrow call, etc? the play is at the 1:41 point of the BTNPlus video. Thanks. It would have been a back row attack on Rousseau if 1) her contact sent the ball onto Wisconsin’s side or 2) her contact sent it into the block of Rettke. Since there was still a portion of the ball above the net tape, Rousseau still had a right to play the ball. Her lucky save in keeping the ball on her side made it legal. |
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Nov 14, 2021 21:45:10 GMT -5
So I need some help from somebody who knows the rules better than I do (that isn't very hard): The LONG delay during the third set was caused by a ball bumped by a Northwestern DS very close to and above the net. Rettke is about to jump to play it as on overpass when the NW setter, who is back row at the time, jums up and pulls it back, and the point continues. Sheffield reacts, holding his hand up while looking at the up ref and walking towards the down ref, all while the play continues. The challenge was ultimately announced as a "touch/no touch" but much of the delay was the play of that ball at/above the net. So my question is when does the NW setter become guilty of a backrow attack etc? Live in the Field House, I thought the ball had travelled across and was fully on the Wisconsin side of the net, but the video shows it was still directly above the net, 50-50 or so on each side. So was Sheffield thinking the same as me, and wanted "goaltending", or was something that should have been an illegal backrow call, etc? the play is at the 1:41 point of the BTNPlus video. Thanks. It would have been a back row attack on Rousseau if 1) her contact sent the ball onto Wisconsin’s side or 2) her contact sent it into the block of Rettke. Since there was still a portion of the ball above the net tape, Rousseau still had a right to play the ball. Her lucky save in keeping the ball on her side made it legal. While I was waiting, I went looking on the internet. The link below is to a page that seems to say otherwise: "A backrow player can play the ball above the top of the net as long as it doesn’t go over the net. Think of a setter playing the ball with a jump set. She needs to set the ball completely on her side of the net while she is backrow. If the ball “breaks the plain of the net” (any part of the ball goes over the net) and she tries to set it, she broke the backrow attack rule, point for the other team." "Part of the ball" was clearly over the net when she jumped and pulled it back. So they have it wrong, did I explain it badly, etc? www.cornnation.com/2019/7/13/18631987/nebraska-huskers-womens-volleyball-strategy |
|
