|
|
Post by badgersinsix on Jan 6, 2024 11:25:56 GMT -5
While it might have merit for us I feel like changing libs every time someone sets out would be abusing this rule change a little bit. Idk if it would but it should count against your subs if you do decide to change. I’d rather it be mainly for situations like the injury in Tennessee-Texas. That’s what it’s for. Happens in the men’s game. Edit: Sorry, I wasn’t clear. My interpretation is the rule change is to allow for having a passing libero in while receiving and a defense libero in while serving. Other use cases for sure, but this seems like the most advantageous. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 6, 2024 11:29:53 GMT -5
I don’t see the libero rule having much effect. If your libero is having a bad set, it provides a mechanism to replace her without a DS contributing to the sub count - but you have to put aside your 2nd best DS as a libero. There aren’t a lot of cases you’d want to do that. There have been no times since I’ve been watching the badgers that they have had 4 BR players of similar level.
The 2nd touch rule is different. It sounds like they are getting rid of double contacts calls on sets by adopting the same rules for 1st and second contacts. That’s a big change I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 6, 2024 11:31:55 GMT -5
While it might have merit for us I feel like changing libs every time someone sets out would be abusing this rule change a little bit. Idk if it would but it should count against your subs if you do decide to change. I’d rather it be mainly for situations like the injury in Tennessee-Texas. That’s what it’s for. Happens in the men’s game. I thought injuries allowed one to substitute the libero without costing a sub. Didn’t that happen against UCLA a few years back in the regionals? |
|
|
|
Post by badgersinsix on Jan 6, 2024 11:34:12 GMT -5
That’s what it’s for. Happens in the men’s game. I thought injuries allowed one to substitute the libero without costing a sub. Didn’t that happen against UCLA a few years back in the regionals? Sorry, I wasn’t clear. My interpretation is the rule change is to allow for having a passing libero in while receiving and a defense libero in while serving. Other use cases for sure, but this seems like the most advantageous. And you are correct about replacing an injured libero. Not sure if that changes now. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 6, 2024 11:35:19 GMT -5
The rule change makes little sense to me. Why would you take your second-best small and put her in a position where only one of the two can be on the court at the same time? Leave her in her DS jersey and both can be on the floor. Or think back to 2019, when UW had Tiffany Clark at libero and Lauren Barnes as the first DS off the bench. I put Barnes in a libero jersey, and only one is on the floor at a time? No, thank you. Passing libero in when receiving and defense libero in when serving. DS’s that can do both are a bonus being on the court with either libero. Wouldn’t libero for libero subs count against the sub allotment? |
|
|
|
Post by badgersinsix on Jan 6, 2024 11:39:15 GMT -5
Passing libero in when receiving and defense libero in when serving. DS’s that can do both are a bonus being on the court with either libero. Wouldn’t libero for libero subs count against the sub allotment? They do not in the men’s game. Still just need both liberos off the court for a half rotation. Liberos (either one) can only serve in one rotation. You could even have liberos A serve, win the point, then libero B switch in and serve the next point. Just for the fun of it, ya know. Assuming that will be the same for the new women’s rule. |
|
|
|
Post by buckypete on Jan 6, 2024 11:39:35 GMT -5
I thought injuries allowed one to substitute the libero without costing a sub. Didn’t that happen against UCLA a few years back in the regionals? Sorry, I wasn’t clear. My interpretation is the rule change is to allow for having a passing libero in while receiving and a defense libero in while serving. Other use cases for sure, but this seems like the most advantageous. And you are correct about replacing an injured libero. Not sure if that changes now. That's a typical use. To use the Badgers as an example for next year, there'd be a possibility to have GG as the serving libero and Damrow/Schumacher as the receiving libero with the other playing the DS role. This allows for both GG's serve and floor defense/transition setting while potential hiding serve receive issues. Another option just for the heck of it would be to put Maike Chan in the second libero jersey if you think you're going to be using both Damrow and Schumacher as DSs. Then you've got a free sub if GG is having a rough receiving day and you want to give her a break. |
|
|
|
Post by swaggyp on Jan 6, 2024 13:23:49 GMT -5
I don’t see the libero rule having much effect. If your libero is having a bad set, it provides a mechanism to replace her without a DS contributing to the sub count - but you have to put aside your 2nd best DS as a libero. There aren’t a lot of cases you’d want to do that. There have been no times since I’ve been watching the badgers that they have had 4 BR players of similar level. The 2nd touch rule is different. It sounds like they are getting rid of double contacts calls on sets by adopting the same rules for 1st and second contacts. That’s a big change I think. The 2nd touch feels like the travel in the NBA. The advantage that it gains the offensive player is very small compared to the improved product you see on the court by not calling every ticky-tack walk. As an old curmudgeon I hate it, but I think the momentum is clear on this one. And similar to the travel, there will be expert technicians able to exploit the (admittedly small) change to the rule interpretation. I have no doubt the Badger staff is already contemplating ways to coach to this new interpretation. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 6, 2024 13:36:56 GMT -5
I don’t see the libero rule having much effect. If your libero is having a bad set, it provides a mechanism to replace her without a DS contributing to the sub count - but you have to put aside your 2nd best DS as a libero. There aren’t a lot of cases you’d want to do that. There have been no times since I’ve been watching the badgers that they have had 4 BR players of similar level. The 2nd touch rule is different. It sounds like they are getting rid of double contacts calls on sets by adopting the same rules for 1st and second contacts. That’s a big change I think. The 2nd touch feels like the travel in the NBA. The advantage that it gains the offensive player is very small compared to the improved product you see on the court by not calling every ticky-tack walk. As an old curmudgeon I hate it, but I think the momentum is clear on this one. And similar to the travel, there will be expert technicians able to exploit the (admittedly small) change to the rule interpretation. I have no doubt the Badger staff is already contemplating ways to coach to this new interpretation. How small is the rule change though? I'm having a hard time figuring that out from the language. The ticky tack calls and inconsistency are definitely a pain - glad to be rid of that - but if you can now touch a ball twice with any part of your body on the second ball and have it only count as one touch as long as it doesn't go over the net, what new options might be exploited in the future? I don't know. I don't know what the rule change in the NBA was, but not having to dribble on a drive to the basket is a definite advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Jan 6, 2024 13:43:04 GMT -5
Passing libero in when receiving and defense libero in when serving. DS’s that can do both are a bonus being on the court with either libero. Wouldn’t libero for libero subs count against the sub allotment? Libero subs never count against the sub allotment. It's in the word: "free" in Italian, meaning a free sub, and free to move positions on the court. |
|
|
|
Post by maigrey on Jan 6, 2024 13:59:48 GMT -5
Passing libero in when receiving and defense libero in when serving. DS’s that can do both are a bonus being on the court with either libero. Wouldn’t libero for libero subs count against the sub allotment? No, when you sub in a libero it doesn't count against the sub count, no matter who they are subbing for. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Jan 6, 2024 14:11:17 GMT -5
Wouldn’t libero for libero subs count against the sub allotment? Libero subs never count against the sub allotment. It's in the word: "free" in Italian, meaning a free sub, and free to move positions on the court. Yeah, I thought the idea that subbing different liberos for each other might be different. But I guess the libero subbing rules make that possible. |
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Jan 6, 2024 14:40:47 GMT -5
Wouldn’t libero for libero subs count against the sub allotment? Libero subs never count against the sub allotment. It's in the word: "free" in Italian, meaning a free sub, and free to move positions on the court. And now let’s teach everyone how to pronounce it. |
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Jan 6, 2024 14:45:36 GMT -5
Libero subs never count against the sub allotment. It's in the word: "free" in Italian, meaning a free sub, and free to move positions on the court. Yeah, I thought the idea that subbing different liberos for each other might be different. But I guess the libero subbing rules make that possible. You could never before sub a libero in women's college game unless there was an injury and the libero couldn't return. |
|
|
|
Post by maigrey on Jan 6, 2024 14:50:58 GMT -5
Libero subs never count against the sub allotment. It's in the word: "free" in Italian, meaning a free sub, and free to move positions on the court. And now let’s teach everyone how to pronounce it. *cue mandatory singing of Libero, libero, libero to the tune of Figaro, Figaro, Figaro* |
|
