|
Post by silverchloride on Jan 8, 2022 11:20:19 GMT -5
Actually, now that I think about it. I am not a fan of the dump. Think it is a residual distaste from beach, doubles, pick-up games. Took me a while to get used to Rally Scoring when my kid first started playing, not sure I am a fan of it still. Missed serve should not end a game. This could be a bias that I have with rally scoring in general, but it is an anticlimactic way to win; a free unearned point; Yay =(
Of course, i could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Jan 8, 2022 11:24:38 GMT -5
I’m not a volleyball historian, but this topic has been debated so many times on this board, I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that the officiating of doubles against setters was never part of the original rules. The point of the rule about double contacts is so that someone does not make two distinct effort to play the ball. If you go back and watch Olympic volleyball from the 60s, there are plenty of sets that are spinning. I don’t know when or how people began interpreting it as a rule that sets had to be clean. It’s just not a rule of Volleyball and never has been, as far as I know.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (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: 28,355
|
Post by trojansc on Jan 8, 2022 11:41:08 GMT -5
The point of the rule about double contacts is so that someone does not make two distinct effort to play the ball. This is why I find the comparison to a 'spiral not coming out perfectly' of a football pass not being an accurate comparison to make in this discussion. It also kind of seems silly to allow a double contact, with 'finger action' on the 2nd contact but not the third. Then again, there's stuff we allow on first contact that isn't good on 2nd or 3rd contact, so, that's not a great argument either. I have mixed feelings. I like keeping it, but also hate the ambiguity in making the call. Meh.
|
|
|
Post by winesalot on Jan 8, 2022 12:04:41 GMT -5
I like it. Take doubles out of matches. It only hurts the setting side anyway. If your setter can't set, that is your team's problem. I won't miss sitting in the stands watching coaches and players holding up two fingers at the ref if a double wasn't called, fans yelling double every time, coaches holding up a match because a double wasn't called, and seeing a ref that is inconsistent with their call If I never had to hear "DOUBLLLE! Oh my gawd, that was such a DOUBLLLE" again, I would not be upset.
|
|
|
Post by vbfamily on Jan 8, 2022 12:40:00 GMT -5
Dear lord the stuff we’re about to see middles do on setter digs lol One year, some time ago, USC's system was actually for Bateman to dig to the middles, and the middles would set the pins when she took the first ball. I don't think I've seen any team (at least of decent level) use this system recently. In this scenario, why would middles not take the second ball off a setter dig…we’ll unless they can’t locate at all, but short distance sets are easy and much easier for pins to hit a ball that is in front of them.
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Jan 8, 2022 13:13:23 GMT -5
One year, some time ago, USC's system was actually for Bateman to dig to the middles, and the middles would set the pins when she took the first ball. I don't think I've seen any team (at least of decent level) use this system recently. In this scenario, why would middles not take the second ball off a setter dig…we’ll unless they can’t locate at all, but short distance sets are easy and much easier for pins to hit a ball that is in front of them. my whole body just cringed imagining all the middles trying to locate sets lmao, no I’m sure some teams will allow their middles to take second ball in that situation but in my experience, I don’t know how many would be able to give good enough sets. Plus then that’s something you have to take time out of practice to coach. I’m not sure how many coaches will want to spend days teaching their middles how to set BUT it would be a competitive advantage if the ball is within their area. I wouldn’t want to see a middle have to move and set either though…
|
|
|
Post by eotexas5 on Jan 8, 2022 13:28:43 GMT -5
In this scenario, why would middles not take the second ball off a setter dig…we’ll unless they can’t locate at all, but short distance sets are easy and much easier for pins to hit a ball that is in front of them. my whole body just cringed imagining all the middles trying to locate sets lmao, no I’m sure some teams will allow their middles to take second ball in that situation but in my experience, I don’t know how many would be able to give good enough sets. Plus then that’s something you have to take time out of practice to coach. I’m not sure how many coaches will want to spend days teaching their middles how to set BUT it would be a competitive advantage if the ball is within their area. I wouldn’t want to see a middle have to move and set either though… When I was a practice player at [redacted] in grad school, their system was to have the middles take the second ball if the setter took the first ball. It actually worked out pretty well for them as the middles worked hard on their setting game.
|
|
|
Post by radioactiveman on Jan 8, 2022 13:28:47 GMT -5
Regarding the throws, my daughter just started her club season and I swear there’s approximately 500% more kids consistently using that throw shot. It seems like anytime the set isn’t perfect, the throw is rapidly becoming the shot of choice.
|
|
|
Post by wonkaman on Jan 8, 2022 17:47:27 GMT -5
A very experienced coach would teach their setters that you have a greater liklihood of being called for a double if your feet are still moving after you set the ball or your hands are too low. Now those may be situations where double contacts occur more frequently, but I've heard from many experienced coaches that many refs (especially the beginning refs) are more prone to call doubles if the feet are still moving after contact or the setters hands are too low and the ball has any kind of spin.
That should not have anything to do with why doubles should be called but some learning refs use that as a point of reference. More experienced refs try to actually discern whether the hands actually contacted the ball at different times. Because it is such a subjective call I would not complain if it is retired, just like the touch off the block used to be counted as the first contact, or the ball hitting the net and going over was counted as a missed serve.
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Jan 8, 2022 18:09:06 GMT -5
One year, some time ago, USC's system was actually for Bateman to dig to the middles, and the middles would set the pins when she took the first ball. I don't think I've seen any team (at least of decent level) use this system recently. In this scenario, why would middles not take the second ball off a setter dig…we’ll unless they can’t locate at all, but short distance sets are easy and much easier for pins to hit a ball that is in front of them. De Genarro uses all 3 hitters Lol
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Jan 8, 2022 18:10:55 GMT -5
In this scenario, why would middles not take the second ball off a setter dig…we’ll unless they can’t locate at all, but short distance sets are easy and much easier for pins to hit a ball that is in front of them. my whole body just cringed imagining all the middles trying to locate sets lmao, no I’m sure some teams will allow their middles to take second ball in that situation but in my experience, I don’t know how many would be able to give good enough sets. Plus then that’s something you have to take time out of practice to coach. I’m not sure how many coaches will want to spend days teaching their middles how to set BUT it would be a competitive advantage if the ball is within their area. I wouldn’t want to see a middle have to move and set either though… Liberos take second ball at the next level, not MBs. Any many are former setters. I see the general approach of L taking the ball continuing.
|
|
|
Post by taxidea on Jan 8, 2022 18:25:54 GMT -5
Regarding the throws, my daughter just started her club season and I swear there’s approximately 500% more kids consistently using that throw shot. It seems like anytime the set isn’t perfect, the throw is rapidly becoming the shot of choice. Yes. Not a good look. The catch and throws are annoying. Should not be part of the game anymore. Should be called every time, no matter the level being played. Much more annoying than all the doubles being called.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (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: 28,355
|
Post by trojansc on Jan 8, 2022 18:27:40 GMT -5
Should be called every time, no matter the level position being played. Edited in an inclusion for you. Looking at you in particular, setters.
|
|
|
Post by oldmanvb on Jan 8, 2022 18:54:48 GMT -5
I have no problem with the proposed rule and probably think it is a good idea. Will the proposed rule change permit setters to change the direction of the set – that is, move the ball across their body rather than front or back? Permitting the setter to in effect move the ball across their body from left hand to right hand to release, in one movement, could drastically impact running the middle. Sorry if I’m doing a bad job of describing the motion I have in mind.
|
|
|
Post by vbct3 on Jan 8, 2022 18:57:30 GMT -5
I have no problem with the proposed rule and probably think it is a good idea. Will the proposed rule change permit setters to change the direction of the set – that is, move the ball across their body rather than front or back? Permitting the setter to in effect move the ball across their body from left hand to right hand to release, in one movement, could drastically impact running the middle. Sorry if I’m doing a bad job of describing the motion I have in mind. No-look side setting the middles is already a part of the game. See Josh Tuaniga from Long Beach, or Nootsara for Thailand.
|
|