Volleyball Preview: UTSA

[1972Shocker]

The bad news is the Shocks only set Natalie 15 times. The good news is Natalie put away 12 of those with no errors. 2 of the 3 attacks she did not get down were absolute rockets that were saved by great digs by the UTSA libero. One one of those Frosty ended the ensuing UTSA attack with an emphatic block solo.

Here is the play I was talking about:

[1972Shocker]

That could not have felt all that good:

[flyingMoose]

No, the Shockers were serving. This cannot be an overlap violation; the Shockers were not the receiving team. A foot fault might have been called on MorganW? After the referee whistled for the serve, she walked from behind the service line onto the court and then walked back behind the service line to serve?

Someone with the Plus may have a better idea.

Coaches Show question. :)

[1972Shocker]

After thinking about this a little more, this cannot be an overlap violation - on the receiving team. A foot fault might have been called on MorganW? After the referee whistled for the serve, she walked from behind the service line and then walked back behind the service line to serve?

How do you have a foot fault when you are not the server? The play I am thinking of was at 14-9 in the 3rd set with Annalie serving. Perhaps you are referring to a different play. I guess it's possible the ref ruled they served out of order, although you would not think that would cause so much confusion.

[flyingMoose]

How do you have a foot fault when you are not the server? The play I am thinking of was at 14-9 in the 3rd set with Annalie serving. Perhaps you are referring to a different play. I guess it's possible the ref ruled they served out of order, although you would not think that would cause so much confusion.

Okay, Annalie. I thought it was later in the set, but perhaps not. I do recall the referee pointing directly at someone/something. But, yes, why the confusion? And had someone actually served the ball yet? It's all running to gather and I am Plus-less.

[1972Shocker]

Okay, Annalie. I thought it was later in the set, but perhaps not. I do recall the referee pointing directly at someone/something. But, yes, why the confusion? And had someone actually served the ball yet? It's all running to gather and I am Plus-less.

Yes, Annalie had intitated her serve but the whistle came very quickly after she made contact with the ball. There clearly was no foot fault. She wasn't evem close to the end line.

[flyingMoose]

Yes, Annalie had initiated her serve but the whistle came very quickly after she made contact with the ball. There clearly was no foot fault. She wasn't even close to the end line.

Okay, it sounds like an out-of-rotation service. Maybe that is what pointing means.

[1972Shocker]

Okay, it sounds like an out-of-rotation service. Maybe that is what pointing means.

It is possible that Webby stepped on the end line as she was going behind Gabi. I look at the ESPN+ video again to see if I can tell if this was the case.

See the last "or" in the diagram below:

https://usavolleyball.org/resource/o...ls-for-indoor/

[1972Shocker]

Okay, I went backed and looked at the ESPN+ video again. Webby was not close to the end line. Based on a motion the up official made after the pointing signal I think what he ruled was that Annalie was to the left of the "left sideline extended" when she contacted the ball on her serve. I couldn't tell from the live action shot but on the one replay they played it does look like that may have been the case. If you knew this was a rule you are one up on me.

If this is the case you would think they would have a dashed sideline extending beyond the end line.

So I believe the call was Annalie stepped "outside" her "court" at the moment of the service hit.

I don't think I have ever seen this call before. Learned something new.

[Critter's Pa]

It is possible that Webby stepped on the end line as she was goring behind Gabi

That may have been it, but I don't think "22 stepped on the line" would have caused such confusion.

My guess at the time was that Webby walked across Gabi, toward the center of the court, before Annalie served. I do not know why "22 moved too soon" would cause confusion or be difficult to articulate.

Or, stay with me here, the up ref thought he saw something wrong that wasn't wrong and didn't want to admit he messed up. He thought Webby was supposed to be in 6, middle back(Or, more specifically, to the right of the person in position 5 and behind the person in position 3), and Gabi was supposed to be in 5, back right (left of the person in position 6 and behind the person in position 4). Webby was moving, but in his mind, she didn't make it to the right side of Gabi before Annalie served. When it was pointed out that Webby was supposed to be in position 5 and Gabi is in 6, he then said Webby moved too soon, or something like that.

[Critter's Pa]

Okay, I went backed and looked at the ESPN+ video again. Webby was not close to the end line. Based on a motion the up official made after the pointing signal I think what he ruled was that Annalie was to the left of the "left sideline extended" when she contacted the ball on her serve. I couldn't tell from the live actions shot but on the one replay they played it does look like that may have been the case. If you knew this was a rule you are one up on me.

If this is the case you would think they would have a dashed sideline extending beyond the end line.

So I believe the call as Annalie stepped "outside" her "court" at the moment of the service hit.

I don't think I have ever seen this call before. Learned something new.

Never seen that called before. She stands so far back, I would think she would notice where she was. I assume that she would know this rule. Not sure how making that call would cause so much confusion. Unless no one but the up ref knew this rule, then I could see the confusion.

When she serves from the right side, she kinda gets lost in the players standing on the sideline. I wonder if she is outside of the line when she serves from there. The down ref never made that call.

[1972Shocker]

Never seen that called before. She stands so far back, I would think she would notice where she was. I assume that she would know this rule. Not sure how making that call would cause so much confusion. Unless no one but the up ref knew this rule, then I could see the confusion.

When she serves from the right side, she kinda gets lost in the players standing on the sideline. I wonder if she is outside of the line when she serves from there. The down ref never made that call.

The way I am understanding the rule is you can start outside the width of the court but at the point you make contact on your serve you must be back inside the width of the court. I am farily confident that is what the call was. Maybe Lambo will talk about in his radio show on Monday.

Here is a link the the 2023-25 USA Volleyball Rule Book: https://usavolleyball.org/wp-content...s-Book_Web.pdf

From Page 22: 1.4.2: Service Zone The service zone is a 9 m (29’6”) wide area behind each end line. (9 meters is the width of the court)

See Diagram 1b on page 89 that diagrams the playing area. Serves must be made from within the service zones at the point when contact with the ball is made.

It would be interesting to know how many of the Shocker players and coaches were aware of this. Like you, I have never seen this called before nor was I aware of this rule, but it does appear to be the rule.

[1972Shocker]

I did not see Putnicki on the bench even.

I can confirm after watching the replay that Putniicki was, in fact, sitting in a chair behind the UTSA bench during the entire match wearing a grey pullover warmup jacket. I did see her holding her crutches at the beginning of the match.

WuDrWu thought losing Putnicki may have been the reason the Shocks were able to win Friday's match. On Friday she was replaced by Katelyn Krienke, a 6-0 sophomore middle blocker. Krienke was not very productive but I don't think it was enough to account for the 14 point advantage the Shocks held in Sets 3 and 4.

In today's match UTSA inserted 6-2 freshman middle Kai Bailey in Putnicki's spot. Kai had entered Friday's match late in the 4th set and had 1 kill on 2 attempts. Prior to this weekend she had played in 12 sets over 8 matches in which she recorded 8 kills.

Putnicki had only played in 2 of the final 3 non-conference games for UTSA before starting to see regular duty in AAC play. For the season she has played in 43 sets over 14 matches. She has not been much of an offensive force hitting 21-10-69 = .159 for an average of 0.49 k/s. Her strength was her blocking with 59 block assists and 6 block solos and averaged 1.51 blocks per set. In her 2 sets on Friday vs the Shocks Putnicki hit 0-0-2 = .000 with 1 block solo and 2 block assists.

In Saturday's match, Bailey was UTSA's best weapon on offense. She hit 11-4-24 = .292 and led UTSA with 4 block assists while scoring a team high 13.0 points. Mia Sorensen was 2nd in scoring with 8.5 points.

Assuming senior Alicia Coppedge uses her extra year of Covid eligibility next year could be that Putnicki may have some serious competition for that 2nd middle blocker spot.

[flyingMoose]

I can confirm after watching the replay that Putniicki was, in fact, sitting in a chair behind the UTSA bench during the entire match wearing a grey pullover warmup jacket.

I knew she had to be there (she is going to sit on the bus the entire match?!), but I just couldn't identify her.

[flyingMoose]

The way I am understanding the rule is you can start outside the width of the court but at the point you make contact on your serve you must be back inside the width of the court. I am fairly confident that is what the call was.

This is a rule I actually knew! It never occurred to me because, although Annalie starts in the middle of the cheerleaders, I never had the impression she started outside the court extended.