The Rules - your opinion, suggestion

  • Guidetti gave a short statement to German press about the things that will be tested. He says that the coaching commission to which he also belongs made some propositions to FIVB, but what will be tested now has nothing to do with those. The coaches don't need rule changes, but FIVB wants the game to be shorter and have less mistakes to be more interesting for TV. He thinks that the serve and backrow attack changes would kill the game.

  • This is not a suggestion about the game rules but about statistics, particularly for "Best setters statistics. It looks quite unfair when they use a formula based on only running sets, still sets and number of setting errors. Number of running sets highly depend on how your team receives. I think there will be a very fair number and order if they simply add Excellent receives as percentage to the formula.


    In an example, imagine that setter A got 10 points and settter B got 5 points today, however Team A has %60 excellent receives and Team B has only %10 excellent receives. With these percentages added, setter A will very likely have a lower point than setter B.

  • If there's a rule I want to change...I really wish the libero can legally attack from the backrow without the net height limit. Just seems so absurd. I think as long as it's not a downward spike... Everything should be totally fine for everyone. :white:

    Favorite players: M: Maxim Mikhaylov, Murilo, Serginho, Aaron Russell, Otavio, Simone Giannelli, Ivan Zaytsev, Tsvetan Sokolov, Michał Kubiak, Mariusz Wlazly, Pawel Zagummy W: Sheilla, Zhu Ting, Natalia, Fe Garay, Fofao, Gabi, Thaisa, Foluke Akinradewo, Wei Qiuyue, Ding Xia, Carli Lloyd, Fabi, Natalia Goncharova, Yuko Sano, Saoris Kimura and Sakoda

  • This is not a suggestion about the game rules but about statistics, particularly for "Best setters statistics. It looks quite unfair when they use a formula based on only running sets, still sets and number of setting errors. Number of running sets highly depend on how your team receives. I think there will be a very fair number and order if they simply add Excellent receives as percentage to the formula.


    In an example, imagine that setter A got 10 points and settter B got 5 points today, however Team A has %60 excellent receives and Team B has only %10 excellent receives. With these percentages added, setter A will very likely have a lower point than setter B.


    I have created a net assists calculation.


    First part (Kills - hitting errors)
    Second part Mulitply by (player sets played/team sets played, if a sub use 0.5 versus a starter of 1.0)
    Third part Multiply by (running + standing sets)/set attempts (minus setting errors)
    Lastly divide by player sets played


    This will give an estimated value of the total spike kills that the setter contributed in total and then to their team per set. If the setter plays more, they have a greater affect.
    You can have a negative value, so the setter made some bad decisions.

  • If there's a rule I want to change...I really wish the libero can legally attack from the backrow without the net height limit. Just seems so absurd. I think as long as it's not a downward spike... Everything should be totally fine for everyone. :white:


    I would love to see the liberos given points for their digs landing on the other side of the net. They used to do it, but not any more.

  • Interesting, thanks.


    For me, not considering for a second all the other problematics/advantages (there are both,imho), that may be enough to consider the experiment as a failure:


    Quote

    Durée de match la plus courte: 43 minutes
    Durée moyenne des matchs: 1 heure et 17 minutes


    I really can't see how shorter matches can help volleyball. Is there actually someone that enjoy a 45 minutes match more than a match that generally is at least 1.15h long, even with a 3-0?
    Imaging paying the ticket for a 45 minutes match... And there are people that drive let's say 1 hours to go to the arena, and 1 hour to go back...



    The things I like of the formula is that with a shorter set the points matter almost since the beginning of the set (while a 4-0 start isn't that scary in a 25 point set, for example).
    On the other hand, I'm afraid we would pay too much in term of lasting of the match (too short) and chances of inverting a result inside a single set. It's also true that a come back during a 15 points set it would be even more epic, as it is when a regular tie break is won after losing 3-8, or 5-10 – to make example that I saw happen. The problem is that happen quite rarely, especially in the male volleyball.

  • The Federation should REDUCE the rules to the minimum level with one sole principle in mind -- HOW TO keep the ball in play and make the game more interesting to watch without all those silly faults caused by various small detailed rules like those faults related to the center line etc etc..... In short they should review the rules and make that sport simpler.


    I want to see the players focusing on the play, keeping the ball afloat not touching the floor, instead of memorizing all the kinds of miniscule rules.... reduce the rules, reduce the level of human's subjectivity (umpires' subjective interferences).


    Just try to apply the KISS principle.... "Keep it simple, stupid"


    "The majority of men are not capable of thinking, but only of believing and are not accessible to reason but only to authority." -­ Arthur Schopenhauer

    Edited once, last by samsara ().

  • Currently, there are 2 technical timeouts in each set at 8 & 16 points (except for the 5th set) and 2 team timeouts. I would like to see 3 technical timeouts in each set (except for 5th set) at 7, 14, 21 points and only 1 team timeout. The 5th set technical timeout can either be at 7 points or stay the same at 8 points as it currently is.


    With 3 technical timeouts, the benefits for broadcaster are that they have more ads breaks at more regular intervals. The extra technical timeout is to compensate for the team timeout that is taken away. Also, I feel that most teams would call a timeout between 20 to 23 points when it crunches time so having a technical timeout at 21 points make sense.


    The other reason as to why there should only be 1 team timeout is because of the 2 challenges given to each team. These days the coaches sometime used these challenges as extra timeouts. Taking away 1 team timeout will help prevent the match from dragging out the overall match time.

  • I completely disagree, please cut off all the the techincal time outs!!!
    The pauses for the video check (potentially infinite) and the discretional time outs (I would keep them both) are definitely enough.


    I would also get rid of the net fault, except the fault on the top and bottom and those faults that interfiere with the game (referee discretion about it).
    I would get rid also of the top and bottom fault, actually xD

  • In an article with German Volleyball Magazin, FIVB declared the recent rule tests in U23 WCHs as a failure. Obviously they didn't say it in such clear words, but they admit that with 4 sets to 15 the length of a match is just as unpredictable as with 3 sets to 25 and the shortest matches were way too short. The new serve rule turned out to be a big advantage for the receiving team and made rallies shorter rather than longer.


    However they'll still continue to look for rules to "improve" the game :roll: The rule commission with Guidetti, Kiraly and other big coaches proposed for example an unlimited number of substitutions and making the process of changing players even faster. IMO this would lead to even bigger specialisation of players, so I don't like it. I wouldn't mind raising the number of substitutions from 6 to 8 because the number of players was raised from 12 to 14, but I don't want to see players who enter to serve 10 times per set and can't do anything else...

  • In an article with German Volleyball Magazin, FIVB declared the recent rule tests in U23 WCHs as a failure. Obviously they didn't say it in such clear words, but they admit that with 4 sets to 15 the length of a match is just as unpredictable as with 3 sets to 25 and the shortest matches were way too short. The new serve rule turned out to be a big advantage for the receiving team and made rallies shorter rather than longer.


    However they'll still continue to look for rules to "improve" the game :roll: The rule commission with Guidetti, Kiraly and other big coaches proposed for example an unlimited number of substitutions and making the process of changing players even faster. IMO this would lead to even bigger specialisation of players, so I don't like it. I wouldn't mind raising the number of substitutions from 6 to 8 because the number of players was raised from 12 to 14, but I don't want to see players who enter to serve 10 times per set and can't do anything else...


    Glad to hear that they realized how stupid the rules were. I also didn't like unlimited number of changes. Reducing technical timeout to one was a good idea. To me, they should quit the technical timeouts for good. Especially when you have so many challenge points, the game stops many times already. It is better not to stop it also for timeouts. Only part of Volleyball that needs improvement is the interruptions of the game for too many times

  • with 4 sets to 15 the length of a match is just as unpredictable as with 3 sets to 25 and the shortest matches were way too short. The new serve rule turned out to be a big advantage for the receiving team and made rallies shorter rather than longer.


    Practically what we all pointed out here before the test itself :rolll:
    Especially the second part, imho.



    IMO this would lead to even bigger specialisation of players, so I don't like it.


    I agree about that. I can understand why a coach can find it useful, but I don't like the idea of super specialization.
    I would like to have the chance to have a maximum number of substitution, but free: for example, player B subs player A, then player C subs player B.



    For the time out, I hadn't realized they only had one in the U23 formula, but I guess it could work in a 15 point set.
    In a 25 point set I think 2 time out are useful (and honestly when I can hear it I don't find them boring), but may be they can be avoided after 20? I know that in these moment can be more useful than ever but it may also be the most entertaining moment when you don't want interruption as a viewer...
    And the tie break could work with just 1 time out for part.

  • Instead of the horrible best of 5 sets thing that never will happen, why did FIVB not try something a la Football, Basketball, Handball etc as a system. I mean they want to make the sport more approachable and interesting for new fans right. I think this is a great thing to try, no more super long matches (personally I adore them) with a time limit of like 60-90 mins with break(s). I mean come on there are so many sets in matches now where you're just waiting for that 25th point without anything actually happening. This way players will have to give 100% untill the end. I'm not saying this will be great and it will be a huge difference and maybe even ruin the sports culture a bit if it happwns. However it surely will make the game more exciting, approachable. I think it is worth a try at least.


    So just point to point, with time limits and breaks.