USA Volleyball Referee Training and Education

THE POLL

R2 blocks S4’s attack. R2 reaches under the net & contacts the ball on Team S’s side but before Team S has an opportunity to play it. What fault should the R1 signal in awarding the ball to Team S?

• Ball Out (Signal #15) – 5%
• Reaching beyond the net (Signal #20) – 28%
• Penetration (Signal #22) – 56%
• Individual misconduct (Signal #6) – 5%
• None of the above. R1 should have allowed play to continue. – 7%

Total Voters: 122

DONNIE GOODWIN RESPONDS:

Those who have worked men’s matches see this situation more often than you would like.

Most likely the ball will be out of play but in this case, team S may have a play on the ball when R2 reaches under the net to contact the ball. At this point Team R has penetrated the plane underneath of the net to interfere with play. Signal 22 should be used to indicate a penetration fault; good for the 56% of voters who got that right. For those who voted for signals 15 or 20, remember that your signal must fit the lay that occurred, which is not the case here.

Upon further explanation to the captain, interference with play is a key factor. Rule 11.2 clearly states that penetration under the net can be legal provided that this does not interfere with the opponents play. This is not the case here and the fault is a violation of this rule.

For the 5% of poll voters who would have awarded an individual misconduct sanction, take a close look at the situations where an individual sanction is in order (starting on p.61 of the 09-11 DCR). Recognize that there is a difference between a playing fault and behavior misconduct (which could play in very significant at the time or later in the match).

Lastly, keep in mind that if R2 inadvertently contacts the ball under the net and has no bearing on the outcome of the play, the R1 should at that point award the ball to the receiving team.

Closed Polls, On the Court

The Poll:

You are the R2… In a tightly contested match, Black blocks an attack by Gold. You clearly see the ball blocked. R1 whistles and calls 4 hits. Gold’s bench explodes. What do you do?

THOMAS HOY RESPONDS:

For anyone who has worked as a referee for a while, this has probably come up. In the end referees want to get the call right. What this scenario asks, “Do we need to make it right, and if so, how?”

In most situations the 64% of the 140 respondents who would step to the sideline to get an invitation to speak with the R1 are generally correct, depending on other variables that might influence the situation. This gives the R2 an opportunity to go over and give input/assurance that a touch occurred and get the call right.

With that in mind, the 5% that chose “accept the call from the R1” display an understanding that there are a limited number of situations in a match when partners disagree…..I saw it one way, my partner has it the other. In those situations, R1 does make the final decision.

Walking across the court without authorization from the R1 (selected by 4%) is a technique that really should be discussed in the pre-match conference and reserved for particularly volatile situations. Use this approach very judiciously.

That leaves us with the last choice — stepping out and signaling touch (preferred by 26%). This is not a recommended technique as it shows up your partner and openly questions your R1’s judgment.

A couple of thoughts– This situation requires strong R1/R2 teamwork. First, discuss during pre-match what you are going to do when close four-hit situations occur… i.e., the R1 will take a quick peek at the R2 to see a head nod or know there is a problem, the R2 will automatically give a discreet signal and then start across, the R2 will stand at the sideline to request a conference, and so on. Second, what needs to happen is that you have confidence in each other, that the R2’s body language does not say something that undermines the R1’s final decision, and that the level of certainty about whether the ball was touched by the block or not is concluded. This teamwork approach will reduce the frequency when the R1 and R2 are at odds with one another. Keep in mind, the R1 has the final call.

Closed Polls, On the Court

The Poll:

You’re R1. Red has just run 5 points. Blue coach gets up as if to make a sub but never gives the signal or actually requests sub. There is a discussion w/R2 that you judge is delaying. What to do?

• Do nothing. The R2 has control over this situation. – 54%
• Blow my whistle several times and get the R2 to recognize that I want the match to resume. — 24%
• Blow my whistle and issue a delay warning to Team B. — 16%
• Blow my whistle and issue a delay penalty to Team B. — 2%
• Something else. — 3%

Nearly 300 votes cast. Bravo. Thanks to everyone who voted.

Some commentary about the situation and the possible options (keeping in mind that every situation is a bit different)…

In general, this is the preferable approach, presuming that your R2 is reasonably competent. Give your partner an opportunity to handle matter as she sees fit.

Certainly, if your R2 is unprepared for the situation, you are wise to intercede. However, if your R2 is at all credible (and the situation isn’t out of hand), the R1 stepping in can undermine the R2’s credibility with both coaches and prevent the R2 from using the tools she might want to use. Depending on the individuals involved, it can also fracture team chemistry.

See comment above, but even more so. Issuing a card “over the head” of your partner makes it much more difficult for your partner to do his job effectively.

See above, but still more fracturing.

Closed Polls, On the Court

Of the 99  voters in this poll, 74 (75%) voted “Legal play, play on” and 25 (25%) voted “Two hits.

In determining if a play is a block or not, you need to be certain that you know the definition of a block:

Rule 14.1.1 Blocking is the action of players close to the net to intercept the ball coming from the opponents by reaching higher than the top of the net. Only front row players are permitted to complete a block.

If a contact meets all the of conditions (close to the net, intercepting the ball from the opponents, and reaching higher than the top of the net), it’s a block. Conversely, if a contact does not meet all the conditions, it cannot be ruled a block and must be a first team contact.

In this case, the contact is clearly not an attack and it meets the standards in Rule 14.1.1. Therefore it should be considered a block followed by the first team contact by the same player.
Play on.

Closed Polls, On the Court, Video

Due to video rights, we no can no longer display this video.

Does this play justify latitude for athletic play given the USA Volleyball ball handling guidelines?

MIKE CARTER RESPONDS:

Based on the camera angle provided, I can clearly see a strong left/right double contact. This is slightly athletic given the size and strength of the setter. I would make this call. I can even see some officials making the call a “throw” as there is definitely prolonged contact. Again, I am calling this because I clearly see a double contact from my angle and the athleticism is not enough to make me give more leeway.

Closed Polls, On the Court