Once upon a time there was a match before my team played. During one set the home side was up something like 24-18. At that point, the opposing coach called timeout. Why?
Granted, these were teenage players. Runs of points are common. As a result, a 6 point deficit can be overcome. But why wait to 24 to call that timeout?
I wrote before on the subject of when to call timeouts. That post includes a discussion of how research shows that timeouts have basically no effect on the outcome of the next point. To my mind, any given point is basically a crap shoot as to what happens. If you’re waiting until the other team has 24, all it takes is one little bit of bad luck and the set is over. Better to take that timeout a little earlier to allow for random events.
What really gets me, though, is when a team is way down with basically zero chance of recovery and the coach calls timeout on set point. What on earth could possibly be accomplished by doing that? Other than prolonging the agony, of course.
This smacks of a coaching feeling like they had to “do something”. If there was something to be done, it should have happened well before set point!
6 Steps to Better Practices - Free Guide
Subscribe to my weekly newsletter today and get this free guide to making your practices the best, along with loads more coaching tips and information.
