Yesterday I got an email asking me to share my opinion on some rules change ideas for the women’s college game. They are presented below as they are actually worded in the survey. I have my own opinion for each in italics. Would be interested in your thoughts.
Currently, the rule requires the volleyball to have a smooth leather or leather-like cover. What is your preference regarding the volleyball: keep the current rule or allow a textured ball (International ball – which is also the NCAA men’s rule)?
I don’t personally have a strong feeling on this either way.
Currently, jewelry is not allowed to be worn by players during competition. Would you be in favor of allowing players to wear small secured jewelry? Jewelry would not be allowed on the hands, wrist or arms.
I’m fine with this.
Currently, the time allowed for intermission between the second and third sets is a minimum of 3 minutes and a maximum of 5 minutes. What is your preference for intermission length: keep it, or change it?
I’m fine with expanding this to allow for promotional activities.
Currently players on the serving team must not take action to prevent the receiving team players from seeing the contact of the serve and path of the ball (screening). What is your preference regarding screening: enforce the current rule or Eliminate the screening rule and allow the serving team to take action to prevent the receiving team players from seeing the contact of the serve and path of the ball?
I’d say enforce the current rule, but really this is probably more about educating people about the actual wording and meaning of the rule as it currently stands. Basically, a lot of what people think is screening doesn’t actually meet the criteria.
Currently, only statistical data may be transmitted to the bench area from any location in the facility. Electronic audio or video devices that transmit information pertaining to the competition from any location in the facility to the bench or court are illegal. What is your preference regarding the transmission of data to the bench: keep the current rule, or change the rule to allow audio and video to be transmitted to the bench from any location in the facility?
I’m good allowing for the additional transmission. It’s something individual conferences can more narrowly regulate.
Currently, it is a fault if a player contacts the ball twice in succession (double) on the second or third team contact. Would you be in favor of allowing a double hit on a second team contact if the ball is sent to a teammate?
Since there usually isn’t any benefit gained by doubling a set – as potentially opposed to when sending a 2nd or 3rd ball over the net – I’m in favor of getting rid of the call. It removes a lot of the issues we have with inconsistent judgement and keeps the ball flying. I’ve shared my view on this before.
Currently, each team is allowed 15 substitutes per set. Would you be in favor of reducing the number of substitutions? If so, would you change it to 8, 10 or 12?
This is something I think depends on level. I’m in favor of making meaningful cuts when it comes to Division I, but think it’s more problematic to do that when you move down the levels. I’d be curious to see some figures on the actual substitution usage rates, though, before I make any real decision.
At the end of a set (when COVID protocols are not in place), if another set is to be played, the referee signals the teams to switch sides. Would you be in favor of allowing teams the option to stay on one side of the court for the entire match at institutional/conference discretion? The default would be to switch sides.
If there’s no clear difference between the sides (e.g. batting cage netting hanging over one, but not the other) and the two teams agree, them I’m good with teams staying on the same side the whole match.
What is your preference with regard to challenges:
Keep the current rule: Each team is allowed 3 challenges per match with an additional challenge in the fifth set. Once a team challenges, their number of challenges is reduced by one challenge regardless of the outcome.
Each team is allowed 2 challenges that the team keeps if the original decision is reversed. Each team receives an additional challenge in the fifth set (not to exceed 2 challenges).
I’m for the keep it if you make it version.
Libero setting challenge
Currently you cannot challenge if a libero is in the front zone when they set the ball to a teammate. Would you be in favor of adding the libero’s location as a challengeable action?
Definitely make it challengable as it’s an easy thing to observe.
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.