World League 2008

Of course we can compare them. Some are better than the others, that's how life is.

People who chose the players have experience yes, but they make a lot of mistakes. By the way, as far as I know, setting award is PURELY MATHEMATICAL. So, if he had a better % than Ball, that means he "deserved", because that is the criterea it is used. Same as in WCH 06, Ricardo was simply amazing, but they gave it to Zagumny, because in the statistics he was above the Brazilian. It is not a subjective award - like MVP - so there is no point arguing with numbers, even if we know who is the better setter.

Quote

BTW was it kind a ignorance that u wrote Ball and "spanish setter"? this "spanish setter" has a name and surname i think...

You find every little detail to nitpick, don't you? I wrote Spanish setter because I was not too sure on his name. I think he is one of the Falasca brothers, but that is it.

Quote from Russkii

It is not a subjective award - like MVP - so there is no point arguing with numbers, even if we know who is the better setter.

Well the statistics showed who was better in THAT competition so why would i argue with them? Stats showed that better was Falasca so he got the award, it is not a big deal for me. So i still don`t get the discussion that Ball is better. During World Cup he wasn`t, that`s all. In th past? i don`t remember other competitions where we could see both of them (i mean Falasca and Ball).

I don`t nikpick. I have just received your "spanish setter" as showing that he is for you like "who cares", cause Ball is better and his name we should remember. That`s all

As I said, I agree that he "deserved" because it is a purely mathematical award, so if his statistics were better, than he should be granted.

But that doesn't mean he played better, because the set statistics depends on the spikers as well. Know what I mean?

Quote from Russkii

But that doesn't mean he played better, because the set statistics depends on the spikers as well. Know what I mean?

It is the same like we said that Giba is getting MVPs because his rivals didn`t defence his attack.

Quote from Ann

It is the same like we said that Giba is getting MVPs because his rivals didn`t defence his attack.

No. What I mean is that sets statistics % depends on how your spikers finish the point - hit or miss - so the best way to compare setters is through subjetive analyse of the matches, and not through numbers - which can lie in this case. But it is ok to me, I don't really care either way. The award is given solely for the statistics, so be it.

Quote from Russkii

No. What I mean is that sets statistics % depends on how your spikers finish the point - hit or miss - so the best way to compare setters is through subjetive analyse of the matches, and not through numbers - which can lie in this case. But it is ok to me, I don't really care either way. The award is given solely for the statistics, so be it.

Actually the award is given to the setter performing the most of "running sets". So this has nothing to do with the spikers being good or not.
But still this is the very subjective statistic .
Now if you look at others numbers, Falasca was better at blocking and at defending. On the other side, Ball was better at spiking (though he did it less) and at serving. You can't really say that out of passing, one was really better than another.

I must say that I am not a big Lloyd Ball fan, and that I really like Falasca's play. But both are great setters for sure.

What this "running sets" mean?

These are supposed to be outstanding sets. I don't know exactly what is the basis. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the spikers efficiency or the brazillian setter would have the best statistics.

I heard - I think some TV commentarist - that it had something to do with how the spikes turned out or something. I never understood it very well.

So if it is subjective - excellent sets - it's unbelievable Ricardo didn't win in the WCH 06, hehe.

You here are all writing about World Cup 2007 and who deserved titles most. Topic is about World League 2008. Every team who is thinking about Olympic Games will have problems with this tournament. Injuries, shape and others for which must think every team. Teams participating in this will be Serbia, USA, Bulgaria, Spain(i'm sure will qualify for Beijing 2008 ), Poland(like Spain), Russia and of course the almighty Brazil. Brazil will be again the best team, except they will have to face France - damn that France - will play at 100%. And for me is the next favourite after Brazil to win this tournament. Russia will target Olympic Games. Our coach Martin Stoev said he will give chance on younger players in World League 2008. But this doesn't mean we will not play against USA and Finland especially.

AFAIK running sets has something to do with the players spiking against only one blocker or no blocker at all and converting it. That does not mean much in my opinion.

And I'm sorry about my ignorance. I know the spanish setter has a name, but I don't know it for sure.

Quote from Brazilian Guy

AFAIK running sets has something to do with the players spiking against only one blocker or no blocker at all and converting it. That does not mean much in my opinion.

And I'm sorry about my ignorance. I know the spanish setter has a name, but I don't know it for sure.

LOL! Yeah, that's what I heard too - something like that. I just don't know what is the right answer now.

Netherlands, Germany and Portugal are the candidates for the last place.

Quote from AFROMAN

Netherlands, Germany and Portugal are the candidates for the last place.

I hope it will be Nedherlands

Quote from Ann

I hope it will be Nedherlands

Yeah, it will be interesting to see them. If they don't play in WL they probably will play in the European League. Can sobebody can tell me something more about it.

I hope it will be Nedherlands, but in my opinion the best of those teams are Germany.

I'm enjoy Poland have easy group , but players will have to fly on all world

Quote from AZSCzewaFAN

I hope it will be Nedherlands, but in my opinion the best of those teams are Germany.

I'm enjoy Poland have easy group , but players will have to fly on all world

Hah, Poland. If Poland want to be vicechampion it must prove against big teams. See Bulgaria's group for example. World League is every year, and is not so important tournament. Also in the qualification phase you play 12 matches, and if final phase - 2 and in case you reach semifinals - only 4.

Quote from superbobo

Hah, Poland. If Poland want to be vicechampion it must prove against big teams.

I thought for beeing (vice)champion we firstly should win, no mater with who

Quote from Ann

I thought for beeing (vice)champion we firstly should win, no mater with who

Return Wlazly and Winiarski in your team, otherwise you have no chance.