Jack Pearson said:

---

flintdragon said:

---

as a parent of a setter, I say good riddance! It's such an ambiguous call and different refs have different interpretations. Here is what I've heard from refs: must see or hear double contact (not just spin), forward/backward rolls are ok, no doubles will be called unless egregious (from PNQ). Some just never call it. Others call it so tight that setters become frustrated. Not every setter is a superstar D1 setter.

In the end, it's just a bad set so the team is already penalized with a less than ideal attack.

---

Disagree. Great hands is what sets great setters apart. This just dumbs down the position and will just usher out all the under 6ft setters out there. If you want to get rid of it in the under 14-15U fine, but by 16U an above either you have the hands or you dont. The continuous play thing is ridiculous. Would be like in baseball getting rid of walks and to bring out at tee after 4 balls so the hitter can take a rip. After all, everyone just wants to see homeruns and big hits smh

---

I'm not saying you are wrong in your opinion at all but I'm calling out the impossible enforcement of the rule that exists today. Different refs call it different ways and I've heard from many a coach wanting the rule just removed. Different areas of the country seem to lean different directions. Even NCAA D1 you can see many doubles not called. Unless it is an obvious double contact. You have entire fan sections calling for doubles with no call from the ref.

It's just a bad set. Ask hitters if they would like to hit a spinny janky set or a perfect set with tempo, arc, location. The good setters would still be evaluated above the rest. Do you penalize a libero for shanking a serve receive? The penalty is already there as your team will probably have to free ball it over.

flintdragon said:

---

Jack Pearson said:

---

flintdragon said:

---

as a parent of a setter, I say good riddance! It's such an ambiguous call and different refs have different interpretations. Here is what I've heard from refs: must see or hear double contact (not just spin), forward/backward rolls are ok, no doubles will be called unless egregious (from PNQ). Some just never call it. Others call it so tight that setters become frustrated. Not every setter is a superstar D1 setter.

In the end, it's just a bad set so the team is already penalized with a less than ideal attack.

---

Disagree. Great hands is what sets great setters apart. This just dumbs down the position and will just usher out all the under 6ft setters out there. If you want to get rid of it in the under 14-15U fine, but by 16U an above either you have the hands or you dont. The continuous play thing is ridiculous. Would be like in baseball getting rid of walks and to bring out at tee after 4 balls so the hitter can take a rip. After all, everyone just wants to see homeruns and big hits smh

---

I'm not saying you are wrong in your opinion at all but I'm calling out the impossible enforcement of the rule that exists today. Different refs call it different ways and I've heard from many a coach wanting the rule just removed. Different areas of the country seem to lean different directions. Even NCAA D1 you can see many doubles not called. Unless it is an obvious double contact. You have entire fan sections calling for doubles with no call from the ref.

It's just a bad set. Ask hitters if they would like to hit a spinny janky set or a perfect set with tempo, arc, location. The good setters would still be evaluated above the rest. Do you penalize a libero for shanking a serve receive? The penalty is already there as your team will probably have to free ball it over.

---

You all know much more than me, but as someone who knew very little about the sport until my 2 daughters started playing club 4-5 years ago, the double call has always been a head-scratcher for the reasons you mention. A better analogy would be a QB who throws a wobbly duck of a pass. Should that be a penalty?

I mean, by definition, a double isn't even an actual double hit....it's just a set with spin on it. One handed tips or tip sets that have spin aren't considered doubles. It has never made sense to me.

Now, something that DOES give an advantage (and is hardly ever called in club unless egregious) is when a setter basically brings the ball down to their nose and throws it back up which should be a lift. I've been told this "style" of set is allowed in beach and so now most club refs are letting it go (UIL refs seem less tolerant). Anyway, if anyone is worried about dumbing down setting, I would start there.

Set location and tempo are still paramount to the game.

If you look at the rules changes over the years it is to increase play sometimes at the expense of safety honestly. HS tends to be more safety conscious.
I hate the centerline rule for club to be honest. I also would rather a setter be able to bring the ball back to her side if it has not completely crossed the net where that is not allowed in club but is in college and HS assuming no legal touch by the opponent to make an illegal back row block

The reason you don't have many 6'4 setters is because they aren't athletic enough or don't have good hands to keep from doubling. This rule is a going to kill the non 6 ft setters because now you can take any giant who has ugly hands and force them to set. Girls that have spent years perfecting the skill are having that all taken away.


I guess I don't know why all of the sudden referees have such a hard time calling it. It's just the easy way out.

flintdragon said:

---

Jack Pearson said:

---

flintdragon said:

---

as a parent of a setter, I say good riddance! It's such an ambiguous call and different refs have different interpretations. Here is what I've heard from refs: must see or hear double contact (not just spin), forward/backward rolls are ok, no doubles will be called unless egregious (from PNQ). Some just never call it. Others call it so tight that setters become frustrated. Not every setter is a superstar D1 setter.

In the end, it's just a bad set so the team is already penalized with a less than ideal attack.

---

Disagree. Great hands is what sets great setters apart. This just dumbs down the position and will just usher out all the under 6ft setters out there. If you want to get rid of it in the under 14-15U fine, but by 16U an above either you have the hands or you dont. The continuous play thing is ridiculous. Would be like in baseball getting rid of walks and to bring out at tee after 4 balls so the hitter can take a rip. After all, everyone just wants to see homeruns and big hits smh

---

I'm not saying you are wrong in your opinion at all but I'm calling out the impossible enforcement of the rule that exists today. Different refs call it different ways and I've heard from many a coach wanting the rule just removed. Different areas of the country seem to lean different directions. Even NCAA D1 you can see many doubles not called. Unless it is an obvious double contact. You have entire fan sections calling for doubles with no call from the ref.

It's just a bad set. Ask hitters if they would like to hit a spinny janky set or a perfect set with tempo, arc, location. The good setters would still be evaluated above the rest. Do you penalize a libero for shanking a serve receive? The penalty is already there as your team will probably have to free ball it over.

---

To answer your question, yes a libero is punished for shanking a serve receive by getting benched and have a poor passing rating. Sometimes they are bailed out by ultra athletic setters who can set out of system and still run an offense without doubling. Now a setter who can't set without doubling gets a free pass. I've seen it time and time again where a team running a 6-2 who has one setter who can't set without doubling and the team has to shift to a 5-1 thus rewarding the setter with better hands.

QBs that throw wobbly passes throw more interceptions and get replaced by someone who throws a good ball.

Jack Pearson said:

---

flintdragon said:

---

Jack Pearson said:

---

flintdragon said:

---

as a parent of a setter, I say good riddance! It's such an ambiguous call and different refs have different interpretations. Here is what I've heard from refs: must see or hear double contact (not just spin), forward/backward rolls are ok, no doubles will be called unless egregious (from PNQ). Some just never call it. Others call it so tight that setters become frustrated. Not every setter is a superstar D1 setter.

In the end, it's just a bad set so the team is already penalized with a less than ideal attack.

---

Disagree. Great hands is what sets great setters apart. This just dumbs down the position and will just usher out all the under 6ft setters out there. If you want to get rid of it in the under 14-15U fine, but by 16U an above either you have the hands or you dont. The continuous play thing is ridiculous. Would be like in baseball getting rid of walks and to bring out at tee after 4 balls so the hitter can take a rip. After all, everyone just wants to see homeruns and big hits smh

---

I'm not saying you are wrong in your opinion at all but I'm calling out the impossible enforcement of the rule that exists today. Different refs call it different ways and I've heard from many a coach wanting the rule just removed. Different areas of the country seem to lean different directions. Even NCAA D1 you can see many doubles not called. Unless it is an obvious double contact. You have entire fan sections calling for doubles with no call from the ref.

It's just a bad set. Ask hitters if they would like to hit a spinny janky set or a perfect set with tempo, arc, location. The good setters would still be evaluated above the rest. Do you penalize a libero for shanking a serve receive? The penalty is already there as your team will probably have to free ball it over.

---

To answer your question, yes a libero is punished for shanking a serve receive by getting benched and have a poor passing rating. Sometimes they are bailed out by ultra athletic setters who can set out of system and still run an offense without doubling. Now a setter who can't set without doubling gets a free pass. I've seen it time and time again where a team running a 6-2 who has one setter who can't set without doubling and the team has to shift to a 5-1 thus rewarding the setter with better hands.

QBs that throw wobbly passes throw more interceptions and get replaced by someone who throws a good ball.

---

So a setter that consistently sets good without spin on the ball will get rewarded with more playing time, even though they aren't getting a penalty called, similar to a libero or a QB?

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Jack Pearson said:

---

flintdragon said:

---

Jack Pearson said:

---

flintdragon said:

---

as a parent of a setter, I say good riddance! It's such an ambiguous call and different refs have different interpretations. Here is what I've heard from refs: must see or hear double contact (not just spin), forward/backward rolls are ok, no doubles will be called unless egregious (from PNQ). Some just never call it. Others call it so tight that setters become frustrated. Not every setter is a superstar D1 setter.

In the end, it's just a bad set so the team is already penalized with a less than ideal attack.

---

Disagree. Great hands is what sets great setters apart. This just dumbs down the position and will just usher out all the under 6ft setters out there. If you want to get rid of it in the under 14-15U fine, but by 16U an above either you have the hands or you dont. The continuous play thing is ridiculous. Would be like in baseball getting rid of walks and to bring out at tee after 4 balls so the hitter can take a rip. After all, everyone just wants to see homeruns and big hits smh

---

I'm not saying you are wrong in your opinion at all but I'm calling out the impossible enforcement of the rule that exists today. Different refs call it different ways and I've heard from many a coach wanting the rule just removed. Different areas of the country seem to lean different directions. Even NCAA D1 you can see many doubles not called. Unless it is an obvious double contact. You have entire fan sections calling for doubles with no call from the ref.

It's just a bad set. Ask hitters if they would like to hit a spinny janky set or a perfect set with tempo, arc, location. The good setters would still be evaluated above the rest. Do you penalize a libero for shanking a serve receive? The penalty is already there as your team will probably have to free ball it over.

---

To answer your question, yes a libero is punished for shanking a serve receive by getting benched and have a poor passing rating. Sometimes they are bailed out by ultra athletic setters who can set out of system and still run an offense without doubling. Now a setter who can't set without doubling gets a free pass. I've seen it time and time again where a team running a 6-2 who has one setter who can't set without doubling and the team has to shift to a 5-1 thus rewarding the setter with better hands.

QBs that throw wobbly passes throw more interceptions and get replaced by someone who throws a good ball.

---

So a setter that consistently sets good without spin on the ball will get rewarded with more playing time, even though they aren't getting a penalty called, similar to a libero or a QB?

---

That is the case right now, it wont be the case after this rule goes in effect. Next year, the setter that is 6'5 that gets the ball in close enough spots but cant set without doubling will be starting because she can also "block". The 5'8" setter with great hands is out of a job....then switches to libero and takes liberos job. The end.

Swollen Thumb said:

---

If a setter can't set without doubling, then I doubt they would have the touch necessary to hit spots consistently which would hurt the offense, just like a QB who can't throw a good ball. So I think your fears are overstated. Noone is going to put a bad setter out there who is tall just because doubles are no longer called.

The real skill in setting is getting to the ball and putting it on the money. That takes good hands and touch. That isn't changing.

---

Watched A&Ms 25 setter recruit last weekend in Austin. She had a couple of doubles called and probably should have had more called, She does not have great hands but is 6'2 and left handed so this rule only helps her out going forward. Before this rule I really thought she might end up as a lednicky RS but this rule changes all of that. Only the beginning of this changing the game. Watch and see.

Swollen Thumb said:

---

If a setter can't set without doubling, then I doubt they would have the touch necessary to hit spots consistently which would hurt the offense, just like a QB who can't throw a good ball. So I think your fears are overstated. Noone is going to put a bad setter out there who is tall just because doubles are no longer called.

The real skill in setting is getting to the ball and putting it on the money. That takes good hands and touch. That isn't changing.

---

I agree with this. It will change the game some, but bad setters won't all of the sudden become acceptable setters.

Was she the one hobbling around on crutches during the recognition for grades ceremony at halftime of the Missouri game last night?

yes

How are we grading this off-season so far? Not sure if any more are coming in but I count: 4 transfers (setter, OH, 2 liberos) and 1 freshman OH.

I know we are waiting for the 2025 class to really start cooking but I would like to see this next year as a springboard of some sort. So many years in a row now that started off well but petered out though with Morrison, it fell apart later in conference.

agree. Not enthused about OH going into next year

Swollen Thumb said:

---

As an aside, our club's 18's played Valley Vipers at a tourny a couple of weeks ago and I was told Amare Hernadez really stood out. She's undersized at 5'11'', but has real juice and a big arm. I know most here see her as a depth player, which might be the case, but was good to hear that she was turning some heads.

---

She was playing American. Not many D1 much less P5 players playing American level at 18s.

https://results.advancedeventsystems.com/event/PTAwMDAwMzI5Nzc90/clubs/14236/standings

Jack Pearson said:

---

Swollen Thumb said:

---

As an aside, our club's 18's played Valley Vipers at a tourny a couple of weeks ago and I was told Amare Hernadez really stood out. She's undersized at 5'11'', but has real juice and a big arm. I know most here see her as a depth player, which might be the case, but was good to hear that she was turning some heads.

---

She was playing American. Not many D1 much less P5 players playing American level at 18s.

https://results.advancedeventsystems.com/event/PTAwMDAwMzI5Nzc90/clubs/14236/standings

---

I'm surprised they played American. Thought their top teams usually played USA level and would play down to Liberty to try to secure an easier bid. American is almost impossible to win a bid (only 1 bid to give).

To be fair though, they are down in RGV area. There aren't a lot of Open teams down there.

This was at MLK Invitational, not Lonestar, but understand your point.

Swollen Thumb said:

---

This was at MLK Invitational, not Lonestar, but understand your point.

---

What is strange about that is I only see their 17s in that tournament.

Does she go by Mia because thats the only hernandez I see on the roster so not sure she was even there? Maybe her sister?

https://results.advancedeventsystems.com/event/PTAwMDAwMzMzNTI90/clubs/14236/standings/70971

Maybe it was Lonestar then. Sorry, I was just trying to pass along some compliments I heard about a commit.

Bird elevated to Omaha Supernovas (new pro league) head coach after some "restructuring"

Does anyone know if the public can buy tickets to the spring game vs Baylor? I don't see the option to purchase tickets on the website.

Is it an actual game Friday or will they play 5 sets regardless of outcomes?

I think that is just a coach's decision, but typically they play 4 or 5 sets in all the single game spring exhibitions I have been to.

I cuoldn't make it Friday. How did we do against Baylor?