The Rules - your opinion, suggestion

  • I do feel that as useful as challenges are, they're often needlessly clogging up the game. Coaches shamelessly use them as virtual timeouts and/or momentum breakers (Marichev :whistle: ).
    I'd maybe introduce a point penalty for an unsuccessful challenge. That way no one would ask for a challenge even though they know the ball was well in or miles out, but just want their players to get a little break.

  • I just did a very rough look at the 2015 World League Group 1 Pool Play (not finals) matches
    15 3-set matches, averaged 97.93 minutes, taking out set breaks and TTO breaks (can't estimate coaches timeouts or video challenges), 37.33 seconds per point
    19 4-set matches, 131.42 minutes, 37.30 seconds per point
    14 5-set matches, 153.07 minutes, 37.15 seconds per point


    So the average overall for the 48 matches were 37.27 seconds per point.


    So if we had 110 minutes stated goal of FIVB take out 3 minutes for say 3 set breaks (5-set match is not the norm). we are at 101 minutes. Take out 2 minutes for the 2 TTOs for each 4 sets (8 minutes total), we are at 93 minutes. If we divide by 37 seconds (rounded) we get 151 points rounded up. Divide it by 4 sets = 37.75 points, we'll round it 38, so are we looking at 19 or 20 point sets to win?


    Women's matches will probably be longer per point. I haven't looked at the World Grand Prix yet, but I'll try to do that shortly.

  • http://www.fivb.org/EN/Media/v….asp?No=58727&Language=en




    And what's going to happen if a match does hit the 1 hour 50 minutes mark? Are they going to suspend it? :S Shortened serve time has already been tried and didn't really work all that great.
    I don't know if this can work.



    Just to let you know, I merged this topic with the "The Rules" one. In my opinion, they belong together and I would have all such information and opinions about the rules in one thread. I apologize for any confusion caused.


    Now, about the new ideas. Let's again start with the most logical question of all - WHY? Why do we need changes AGAIN? Mass spectators, we all know many and are asked by many, can even nowadays barely handle the antenna rule, the appearance of a libero, the net touch rule being discarded and soon reinstated, etc. They are figuratively lost in the annual attempts of FIVB to change the format of the World League, for instance, and they can hardly understand the whole point of the tournament. These regular changes are moronic (I am sorry, I mean it) and do no good to the game. We can't win neutral spectators this way. In my opinion, volleyball doesn't need some new rules, or maybe not radical ones, but it rather needs a better running governing body.


    Second, a question asked many times already, even by me - what's wrong with a tennis match lasting 4,5 hours? There is a great TV coverage and lots of money. Volleyball's usual duration between 1:15 hrs and 2:30 hrs seems actually quite acceptable. Why do we need to change the game's ideology just because TV broadcasters want to modify it? It's their problem, obviously they can accept tennis as it is.


    Third, look at the tournaments in Poland, Japan, Bulgaria, Italy, etc. Look at the interest of volleyball and beach volleyball at the forthcoming Olympics in Brazil. Forget about whether it is a volleyball country or not. Interest is there, amateurs adore volleyball, the game is popular. Then, I am sure, there would be broadcasters to show it as it is.


    One last point. The Challenge System has been proven, to me at least, as a success. It is a matter of time for technology to make its way into sports more seriously and in volleyball this is probably the first step. This is something people and volleyball fans should start to accept as an inevitable innovation. And I am sure most are positive about the Challenge System as a way to reduce errors. There are still cases to be discussed and improved, but this is the right way. My opinion is that rules should stay as they are in order to make volleyball recognizable globally. If more is possible, for instance. I would actually enjoy only one TTO per set and with some improved speed of video replays the Challenge System might not even affect overall time so much. But I see any other change as a way to seriously intervene with the quality of a volleyball match.

  • Here are the Numbers for the World Grand Prix Group 1 matches (not finals)
    31 3-set matches, 33.71 seconds per point
    17 4-set matches, 33.40 seconds per point
    6 5-set matches, 34.58 seconds per point


    Overall average for all 54 matches 33.71 seconds per point.


    So the women are 3.5 seconds faster per point than the men's game. Could that be due to service errors? Each service error (serves into the net) requires the ball being cleared from the court, which takes up a little extra time.


    Something that I found odd was that last year there were 10 World League matches where it took over 40 seconds per point, while the highest women's game was 39.31 seconds.


    Doing the same math with 93 minutes, divide by 34 seconds = 164 points divide by 4= 41 points, 20-21 point sets anyone?

  • I agree with every word of YavorD's post. Not again so many stupid attempts of making the game more attractive when all they do is making it less attractive :aww:


    One thing I wonder: on the level where I play, even 5 set matches never last 2 hours, they are usually done after 1h45-1h50. And we don't have kids that give the ball to the server. And we do have long rallies. And I assume the way we play is much slower than professional teams. So why do the matches on high level last so much longer? One thing are the technical time-outs, nobody except TV needs them but then TV complains about the match duration. Why don't we just play sets until 15 but with 3 technical time-outs per set? TV can show so much advertising then, but nobody will be interested in watching any more.

  • I am going to propose the following in order to get matches under 1:50, for a full 5-sets.


    We play best of 5 sets. Sets are 15 points, must win by two, but a cap at 20 points, so 20-19 would be the highest score. Except in the 5th set, must win by 2 points, no cap.
    One TTO per set. 1 timeout per set by coach. 5 maximum. 1 challenge per set, if going past 15, referees will ask for video if it is close.


    Some matches will be done in less than 1 hour. But even if you went 20-19 in all 5 sets with 35 second points, TTO (1 min), you are at 1:47 without coaches timeouts or challenges.

  • Better to comeback to My rules- 3 quarters with 30 minutes, 1 time out 1 min. per quarter included in 30 minutes, 2 breaks between quarters per 10 min and 10 minutes for highlights.

  • Better to comeback to My rules- 3 quarters with 30 minutes, 1 time out 1 min. per quarter included in 30 minutes, 2 breaks between quarters per 10 min and 10 minutes for highlights.


    The time frame of sets has to be shorter (quarters/periods in this case). 30 minutes is forever in TV sports. Soccer has no problem with it, but after watching basketball, hockey, baseball and American football, TV wants ads probably every 10 minutes.


    So if you had 4-20 minute quarters, 80 minutes, plus 1 TTO at 10 minutes (up to 84 minutes), 3 minutes between 1-2 and 3-4 quarter (up to 90 minutes), 10 minutes halftime (up to 100 minutes) and then 4 time outs (used at any time, 1 min each), you've got 108 minutes. If tied 7 minutes of overtime (1 timeout each team), we still get done in less than 2 hours.


    One problem with quarter matches is that there can be blowout games. You would then have to change scoring slightly, move the back row back to 4 or 5 meters, get 2 points for a spike from behind the line and also an ace in worth 2 points.


    My reasoning for the 15 point-sets is that it goes back to original scoring (people remember you had to get to 15, but couldn't remember that you could only score on your serve). It would keep games close, so there is almost always tension in the game. This what draws us in as fans.


    Could it be changed to best of 7 at 15-points, possibly. But look at table tennis, they only go to 11 points for sets.

  • Is this even real???!!! Is FIVB Crazy? :down:


    http://www.oasport.it/2016/03/…l-debutto-fivb-scatenata/


    They are going to test some new rules in dutch male league.


    If I could understand this confusing system, now instead the 5 sets would be to times of 2 sets of 15 points each. The team to win must win both times.


    If each team win one set inside one time, then a mini tie-break of 7 points will be played to define the winner of this time. If each team wins one time than an extra set of 15 points will be played to define the winner of the match.


    Honestly is so confusing, imagine a person not familiar with volleyball sitting to watch it the first time.
    Plus they really think this will solve the time of the match for tv, with all this break between sets?


    I REALLY HOPE this doesnt go further....



  • Corollaries made by volleyservice.ru, they obviously got the result and did some observations.


    Pros: it takes less than two hours.


    Cons: a match might take less than 45 mins if there is a difference in the level of two teams. Also, this format is more suitable for non-professional tournaments when several matches per day are required.


    I tend to agree with them and find these corollaries rational. I don't see how this will ever get approved and taken seriously.

  • I've read this topic and from my experience I could say that "net foul (net touch)" should be only penaltized when player is interfering with the play. :cheesy:


    And about video check, I think that if a coach was wrong about challenge, the team should be taken one time-out away, so the game wont stop so often.


    But, that's just me :D