Thank you, for explaning and showing examples, this rule has been stuck at the back of my head for a long time( cuz i didnt understand it till now lel ).
Hey, so about the last rule. I found a vid where lets say the left team is team A, while right team is team B. Team A serve and team B received but the ball clearly going to team A court, but team B setter jump and his one hand way over the net to the opponent court, almost touching the ball but he didn't touch it. Team A missed the ball because the team B hand kinda waving near the ball. Is that allowed? I dont think its even counted as a over net block, just his one hand go way over across the net
Nah that first example confuses me. 85% of that ball is on the setters side and a sliver crosses, his contact was on his side too but its a reach?? In that case any ball that's slightly overpassed like that which is quite often will never be played. I need some clarification
From what i see, its because almost half of the ball is already in opponent court, and his right hand touch the part that already in opponents court. Maybe thats why its a foul. But if he just use one hand from below to set it, i think its still okay. Sometimes its also depend on the referee tho
I dont get this first example. So the ball in in the middle of net. So if player from the video want to play it, than its fault. But if we imagine there player from second team than there is also fault, cause ball is partly on the oponents side from his perspective to. That confuses me :/
it's not because the ball is in the middle of the net. You can still play that ball if you touch it on your side, you just can't play the part of the ball that is on the opponent side (contact with the ball has to be on your side of the net, just as simple as that). as a referee you can call the first fault to occur, so if 2 players commit a fault you call the first one. This will be rare but if 2 players of opposite team commits a fault at the same time, then you replay the rally.
I'm confused by the 1st example and the last example. In the 1st, the ball is on the plane of the net, and any setter contact then becomes illegal? You're saying the ball is in the opponents space, but it's also in your space. Seems like the ball is fair game and playable by both sides, and if the setter is back row, then it does become a back row "attack" if the blocker also touches. Seen this play countless times at the college and pro levels. Last example, you stated that because the setter didn't jump, the ball fully on the setters side is fair game to a blocker because the setter didn't have a play. But that's not really true that the setter doesn't have a play, in fact in that scenario, the setter could be being denied of being able to make a play. It's not the jumping thats the issue. Point being, rules state it's okay if no one has a play, but then that only really follows if there is no one near that could make a play. A setter, or even non setter at the net can still make a play as long as they're close.
@@minhkhoivu9597 it depends on a few things. however it doesn't matter if it's with 1 hand or both. The simple answer is the blocker can always touch the ball ON HIS SIDE OF THE NET. And the blocker can reach over the net after an attack (or simultaneously with the attack) It is a fault to block in the opponent space before an attack. To apply correctly the rules it is important to understand the definition of an attack: 13.1.1 All actions which direct the ball towards the opponent, with the exception of service and block are considered as attack hits. (you don't necessarily need to spike to be qualify as an attack) Do note if a setter is trying to play the ball before it crosses the net, the pass can't be considered an attack, however if no one from the attacking team is trying to play the ball, the pass would then be considered an attack if it is sent toward the opponent. Also after a 3rd hit, a referee should never call a reach over on a block. Hope this helps.
@@minhkhoivu9597 you probably deleted your last question, but regarding: "if the pass get the ball right on top of the net and the setter trying to play the ball, do the blockers allowed to touch it?" yes but only the portion of the ball that is on their side. Moreover in the case the setter is back row, depending on the situation the setter may commit an attack fault. here is a good example from the casebook: 3.33 - A back row setter jumped from within the front zone and set the ball while it was completely above the height of the net, directing it towards an attacker. Before the attacker could contact the ball, it penetrated the vertical plane of the net where it was blocked by the opponent's setter. Was there a fault? Ruling: Yes. The set became an illegal attack hit by a back row player when the attack hit was completed (in this case by contacting the opponent's block). The rally is won by the blocking team. (Rule 13.1.3) 13.1.3 - An attack hit is completed at the moment the ball completely crosses the vertical plane of the net or is touched by an opponent.
I’m confused - at 2:19 you say this would be legal if the setter wasn’t there, but it seems that the ball was on the setter’s side of the net, so wouldn’t that be illegal?
let's make this a little bit clearer to understand. The rule state you can block over the net after an attack. An attack is any hit that sends the ball to the other team (ball crossing over the net between the antennae etc.), it doesn't necessarily mean a spike. If the attacking team try to play the ball before it cross the net, that means the ball wasn't "attacked" yet, so in this case the blocker can't reach over until the attack is made. This is why in this example, because the setter tried to play the ball you can't interfere with him. However if the setter wasn't there, you could argue the ball was attacked... If the ball is not in a path to cross the net this cannot be considered an attack, so no reaching allowed here, however do note a referee should never call a reach fault to a blocker after a 3rd hit.
@@Marcv1285 Ah I see, however I spoke to a national league referee and he mentioned the part you mentioned at the end - that it doesn't matter if it is on the 3rd hit, you can still overreach after the 3rd hit
@@IWRKOUT1 Assuming you meant to say "you can't reach" cause otherwise your statement don't make sense, your national league referee is wrong, tell him to read back the guideline on "Rule 14: Block: #2 Sets and allowable passes (not attacks) which do not cross the net towards the opponent's court may not be blocked beyond the net EXCEPT AFTER THE THIRD CONTACT."
Thank you, for explaning and showing examples, this rule has been stuck at the back of my head for a long time( cuz i didnt understand it till now lel ).
Very informative,,thanks a lot
Great explanation!!!
The first example is so dead wrong on setter fault for reaching.
Can you block parallel to the net even if it interferes with a set?
Hey, so about the last rule. I found a vid where lets say the left team is team A, while right team is team B. Team A serve and team B received but the ball clearly going to team A court, but team B setter jump and his one hand way over the net to the opponent court, almost touching the ball but he didn't touch it. Team A missed the ball because the team B hand kinda waving near the ball. Is that allowed? I dont think its even counted as a over net block, just his one hand go way over across the net
Do these same ruled apply to sand because all of those plays I see played on all my sand leagues
Nah that first example confuses me. 85% of that ball is on the setters side and a sliver crosses, his contact was on his side too but its a reach?? In that case any ball that's slightly overpassed like that which is quite often will never be played. I need some clarification
From what i see, its because almost half of the ball is already in opponent court, and his right hand touch the part that already in opponents court. Maybe thats why its a foul. But if he just use one hand from below to set it, i think its still okay. Sometimes its also depend on the referee tho
If the ball is in my space and no hit is performed from my side ... Can a player from the opponent side hit it
I dont get this first example. So the ball in in the middle of net. So if player from the video want to play it, than its fault. But if we imagine there player from second team than there is also fault, cause ball is partly on the oponents side from his perspective to. That confuses me :/
it's not because the ball is in the middle of the net. You can still play that ball if you touch it on your side, you just can't play the part of the ball that is on the opponent side (contact with the ball has to be on your side of the net, just as simple as that). as a referee you can call the first fault to occur, so if 2 players commit a fault you call the first one. This will be rare but if 2 players of opposite team commits a fault at the same time, then you replay the rally.
Voolleyball
I'm confused by the 1st example and the last example. In the 1st, the ball is on the plane of the net, and any setter contact then becomes illegal? You're saying the ball is in the opponents space, but it's also in your space. Seems like the ball is fair game and playable by both sides, and if the setter is back row, then it does become a back row "attack" if the blocker also touches. Seen this play countless times at the college and pro levels.
Last example, you stated that because the setter didn't jump, the ball fully on the setters side is fair game to a blocker because the setter didn't have a play. But that's not really true that the setter doesn't have a play, in fact in that scenario, the setter could be being denied of being able to make a play. It's not the jumping thats the issue. Point being, rules state it's okay if no one has a play, but then that only really follows if there is no one near that could make a play. A setter, or even non setter at the net can still make a play as long as they're close.
What about blocking? Can we reach beyond the net?
yes you can as long as you don't interfere with opponents play.
@@Marcv1285 could you tell me if it is a foul when the blocker touch the ball when the setter is trying to play the ball with just 1 hand?
@@minhkhoivu9597 it depends on a few things. however it doesn't matter if it's with 1 hand or both.
The simple answer is the blocker can always touch the ball ON HIS SIDE OF THE NET.
And the blocker can reach over the net after an attack (or simultaneously with the attack)
It is a fault to block in the opponent space before an attack.
To apply correctly the rules it is important to understand the definition of an attack:
13.1.1 All actions which direct the ball towards the opponent, with the exception of service and block are considered as attack hits. (you don't necessarily need to spike to be qualify as an attack)
Do note if a setter is trying to play the ball before it crosses the net, the pass can't be considered an attack, however if no one from the attacking team is trying to play the ball, the pass would then be considered an attack if it is sent toward the opponent.
Also after a 3rd hit, a referee should never call a reach over on a block.
Hope this helps.
@@Marcv1285 thank you sm
@@minhkhoivu9597 you probably deleted your last question, but regarding:
"if the pass get the ball right on top of the net and the setter trying to play the ball, do the blockers allowed to touch it?"
yes but only the portion of the ball that is on their side. Moreover in the case the setter is back row, depending on the situation the setter may commit an attack fault.
here is a good example from the casebook:
3.33 - A back row setter jumped from within the front zone and set the ball while it was completely above the height of the net, directing it towards an attacker. Before the attacker could contact the ball, it penetrated the vertical plane of the net where it was blocked by the opponent's setter. Was there a fault?
Ruling:
Yes. The set became an illegal attack hit by a back row player when the attack hit was completed (in this case by contacting the opponent's block). The rally is won by the blocking team. (Rule 13.1.3)
13.1.3 - An attack hit is completed at the moment the ball completely crosses the vertical plane of the net or is touched by an opponent.
I’m confused - at 2:19 you say this would be legal if the setter wasn’t there, but it seems that the ball was on the setter’s side of the net, so wouldn’t that be illegal?
if he was not there it would be legal.. but he was setting the ball so it was illegal
@@dnd5501 I see, so if you block you can reach over the net as far as you like, as long as it’s not interfering with the set and/or set?
let's make this a little bit clearer to understand.
The rule state you can block over the net after an attack.
An attack is any hit that sends the ball to the other team (ball crossing over the net between the antennae etc.), it doesn't necessarily mean a spike. If the attacking team try to play the ball before it cross the net, that means the ball wasn't "attacked" yet, so in this case the blocker can't reach over until the attack is made. This is why in this example, because the setter tried to play the ball you can't interfere with him. However if the setter wasn't there, you could argue the ball was attacked...
If the ball is not in a path to cross the net this cannot be considered an attack, so no reaching allowed here, however do note a referee should never call a reach fault to a blocker after a 3rd hit.
@@Marcv1285 Ah I see, however I spoke to a national league referee and he mentioned the part you mentioned at the end - that it doesn't matter if it is on the 3rd hit, you can still overreach after the 3rd hit
@@IWRKOUT1 Assuming you meant to say "you can't reach" cause otherwise your statement don't make sense, your national league referee is wrong, tell him to read back the guideline on "Rule 14: Block: #2 Sets and allowable passes (not attacks) which do not cross the net towards the opponent's court may not be blocked beyond the net EXCEPT AFTER THE THIRD CONTACT."