Volleyball is Beautiful Just the Way It Is…

12/1/23

The volleyball community can be a fickle beast. Lots of opinions, lots of ideas, and lots of personalities in a small biosphere, often times debating items in the game, rules, or strategy for victory. As with any group, there are different types of heroes and villains, often earning their monikers based on the perspective of the beholder. Generally, all have their side of the story to tell and generally all are pretty harmless. Add that, in today’s article, we’re talking about Rhode Island…so there’s a political component in the smallest state of the union that is vastly understood as well as there are easily recognizable personas involved in the spirited arguments on most anything with a net and antennas. Short of it, a normal bystander can see that no one will agree much on anything. I’ll also argue, as I’ve done in the past, that due to the complexity of human beings in general, regardless of location and grouping, agreement is hard to come by. This is why, by the way, freedom of speech and thought is so massively important to our society. Most ideas and thoughts said, are rejected because only a really good idea could be generally accepted by the majority of individually intricate persons. Hence, we keep the good ideas, shed the 90% bad ones.

So, it’s with that opening idea in mind that the topic of changing the rules of volleyball, or more so how the rules are interpreted during a match, flew across my bow. On a thread, that featured Rhode Island coaches, officials, and players, appeared the idea of eliminating the double contact for the second touch…i.e. doubles called on the setter. Many jumped into the fray on this one, and it appeared to be split down the middle. On one side, a couple of very good officials in the region argued that eliminating double contacts as a violation would enhance the game, make it easier for officials, and lead to more exciting rallies. On the other side, were some coaches who felt that eliminating the double contact would create a less aesthetically pleasing game while also equalizing the good and the bad levels of prospective teams. As the thread continued to unravel, I checked in from time to time as individuals in the RI volleyball world made their cases on the matter. Finally, after reading one of the last posts, I made the decision to not get involved and go to bed.

Why?

Well, because I figured it was exactly what was written at the start of this article. Different people, different opinions, whatever… Then, as I started meeting and talking with people who also had access to the thread, questions began to come my way. “Why did you sit that one out?” “No comment from ResV?” “No real thoughts on changing the game, Res?”

Of course, I had thoughts on the matter. I’ve studied the game since 1996! I saw the game evolve twice (at least). I had to relearn it three times (three times as a player as well)! It wasn’t until 2018 that I felt confident enough to say I was a borderline authority on the sport, and it also took three different mentors to get me close to that alone. Volleyball, for better or for worse, is part of my identity, and when people I respect start talking about it, I listen and often are eager to throw my two cents on the pile. Heck, I even get riled up when people outside of my knowledge circle besmirch the game, do harm to it’s legitimacy, or effect any sort of outcome that I see as blatantly wrong. It’s often not a good look, or at least not the look I want out there on me, but none the less, I care about the sport and often times feel obligated to protect it from both outside and inside invaders.

I just didn’t feel like late at night on a Messager thread, was the time or place.

I’ll make a quick case now, though…

The Fall Out: Let’s start with the fall out of implementing something like this. There will be unanticipated consequences to making a change in this vein. It reminds me of the time, want to say maybe 2013 / 2014, when someone had the bright idea that nets would only be violations if the player(s) touched the top tape. Same sort of vibe went with it…make more rallies, easier on the officials, etc. What ended up happening was it was implemented, games got weird as players would net and stop playing because that’s what they always did, rallies would either die or become slugged into a free ball as players started playing again realizing that there wasn’t a violation now, and from there often a lack luster ball would fall to the floor. It would get slightly better as the year went on as teams learned to live with it, but also more and more touching of the net occurred. It got to the point where the net was always moving as combatants would flagrantly touch the net, because why not? In the end, after a year of playing under this rule, the governing body decided they didn’t like it and reversed it back to the way it had been for the playoffs. That led to alarming number of net calls that year in the playoffs because you can’t just turn it off like a spicket of water. The players of all the playoff teams had been playing under this “top tape” rule for four to five months and now you can’t touch the net at all? Come on. So, that change absolutely effected, negatively, the game and leagues for an entire season…from start to finish.

Eliminating doubles will have some sort of similar effect. It might be something predicted, like teams with bad hands now competing with teams with good hands…or perhaps something unforeseen like offenses devolving into taking your tallest player, perhaps the best blocker, and making them the setter because now it doesn’t require clean hands and the number of hoods advances 10% points higher while offense efficiency plummets (just to take a stab at a prediction). The fall out will be real, and it has to be worth the effort. I think rule changes that the game has stuck with…passing with hands, eliminating let serve side outs, and the switch to rally scoring, were worth the overall game adjustments which is why we still use them today. Their value outweighed what it would do the game. I’m just not certain that eliminating doubles has the same value over cost bang for its buck.

The Popularity of the Sport: One of the main things that jumped to my mind when this topic came up was why are we even thinking about this right now? The game is as popular as it’s ever been! I mean, what, 90,000 people went to a Nebraska / Omaha match? Granted that may have been just for the uniqueness factor of seeing a volleyball match in a big football stadium…and who doesn’t like tailgating for any sport? Still, that’s a lot of butts in seats for a volleyball match. You can also add that Wisconsin played in front of 17,000 fans when they hosted Marquette this season. Both matches were records, by the way, for people attending outdoor and indoor volleyball events. Meanwhile on TV, when Wisconsin swept Minnesota on Fox Sports, a reported 1.6 million people watched the event (current record for most people watching a college volleyball match). All of this has happened in the now, with the current climate for volleyball being as popular as I’ve ever seen it. Even professionally leagues are starting to take off. Athletes Unlimited may have cracked the code for the female professional league, marrying stats and events together to create almost a fantasy volleyball world where teams can change but big-time volleyball is always happening. The Volleyball League of America is gaining traction on the men’s side of things. The once passion project for Lloy Ball (Olympic Gold Medalist for the U.S.) now features eight perennial teams across the country at the top level, with a secondary level hosting roughly twenty teams in each region (West, Central, and East)…with Rhode Island joining them soon! So, in my opinion, now is not the time to start changing things in the game. Now is the time to stabilize the rules, promote the levels of competition, and work harder at the youngest stages of play to develop the skills needed to be good, even professional, players in the future…which leads me too…

Preparation for College Athletes and Beyond: Taking away doubles, or as I like to think of it, making setting super easy, would damage players going to the next tier. Unless college volleyball is ready to make that same call in the rules, this cannot be made at the high school or club level. You can’t have a kid grow through the game chucking the ball and making unclean contacts throughout his or her early years, and then expect him or her to come to college and make a quick change to clean, permissible contact. Will they make the adjustment, yes. Will it take time, absolutely. Will it affect the level of play across the country, assuredly. The game is hard, and it takes prolonged skill work, like anything else, to get to a level that is mastery. Retarding that process of setting the ball correctly, cleanly, and in competitive situations stalls the development of the player and will set them back, I would argue, years. And those are years that set back a college program as well or any beach aspirations too. In the beach game, setting is, or at least it used to be, very scrutinized. Indoor players play beach, and vice versa, so again, slowing down the development of the setting skill will cause issues in numerous ways. Across the country, all athletes need to have the skills to survive and thrive in the college world and beyond, so making changes to the skills needed to achieve is a dangerous concept even if the proposal is considered a minor alteration to the game.

The Job of the Officials: So, this part of the show is the one I’ve thought the most about, as the biggest proponents of this action forward appeared to come from officials over coaches. I officiate matches from time to time, but I’m more coach than referee and this topic made me do plenty of mental gymnastics to try to see where both sides were coming from. Again, when seeing the topic originally, my gut reaction was just…nope, we shouldn’t do that. Then, seeing the opinions of some officials…well, I still thought nope, but at least I have a better idea what the issue is and why many think it’s a good path forward. The idea, by the officials (and others), is that since referees cannot agree on what a double is…or a better way to put it is that each referee’s version of what constitutes a double is different, then removing the violation would make the game…1, easier to officiate…2, create a more fair and balanced game…3, leave coaches with less to complain about…4, keep awesome rallies alive.

Let’s take these items in order.

First, easier to officiate…I have to think this has to do a little bit with referee shortages in the sport (all sports for that matter). Making the game easier to navigate does the game a disservice, however. Granted, we’re talking about subjective calls, and human error in the officiating world is a real thing. It always will be. I remember one of the best umpires in Major League Baseball calling a guy safe at first in the 9th inning when the guy was clearly out (would have been the third out and game over), and it cost the pitcher a perfect game. It was anger inducing to be sure…but then the ump went on live TV and was interviewed about it. All he could say was he made a mistake. I think he even went as far to say how terrible he felt that he cost that young man (the pitcher) a perfect game and he has to live with that for the rest of his life and can never do enough to make it up to the player and the sport. Sure, the consequences of human error at the professional level are way higher than college or high school, but the point is it happens and even to the top in their profession. Good coaches and players understand this and try to give the officials grace as the job is hard.

With that being said, however, every coach in the business knows officials that aren’t great at their job and genuinely do not want to see them if helped…because competency matters. So, officiating is between a rock and hard place. They need refs, as many are aging out, but coaches are difficult with new officials who are not competent…but how do referees get competent but to do matches and make errors to learn from? Also consider that the game isn’t really about officials, it’s about the players. Officials are a mechanism of the game, not the primary focus (in fact, my goal as an official is to be boring, exact, and competent, so that the match ends with me sneaking out and no one remembering I was there). So, in my mind, the answer is more on having a conversation / training with both coaches and officials laying it all out, rather than changing the rules for an easier game to officiate.

Maybe a simple conference three times a season that spells out that the officials will be focusing on X, Y, and Z, and coaches need to recognize that many are new and will make errors to continue to learn. Even better, make it into a townhall that allows the coaches and the officials to discuss things that bother them with the hopes of learning for and from both. Prime example for me, was when I was a coach at the collegiate level, nothing would get me more bent out of shape then when an official would tell me I’m wrong. Tell me I’m wrong, and I’m coming back at you, because I wouldn’t have brought it up if I didn’t feel strongly about it in the first place. Granted, there are coaches, that just bust referee chops to try to intimidate or get a call, but that’s not me (to my knowledge…lol). Now, if I feel pretty strongly about something, and instead of telling me I’m wrong, I get…Coach, I hear you, but we just don’t have that call here…I’ll go back to my role and feel like at least they heard me. Way different reaction, right? That’s the difference between a seasoned ref and a new one. Meanwhile, if I’m a referee, and we have a situation where a play occurs and I call what I saw, and the coach is totally flabbergasted…well, then, I bring the down official over along with my line judges to talk it over to try to get it right…however if from there on the coach proceeds to lose it over every close play because clearly I’m incompetent because I brought the entire officiating crew over to try to get a call right that perhaps we missed…well, that coach is being a disingenuous jerk and that’s not cool either. Understanding comes from good faith conversation…so, perhaps two townhall style conference calls along with two informative conference calls could lead to a nice middle ground for both coaches and officials…and none of it means changing the rules of the game.

Second, with the change, we’d get a fairer and more balanced match. Well, no matter how hard you try, life isn’t fair, so that is the starter, but I don’t think that’s what the idea is. It’s more about taking subjectivity out of the equation…Referee John’s double is different from Referee Scott’s double, which is different from Referee Jane’s double. Point taken, however, now we’re getting into the weeds of letting teams that aren’t good getting competitive advantages over teams that are. One thing that is probably static between Ref John, Scott, and Jane is that if the ball is set well, the whistle does not go off. So, how does a team, or player, get to that level? Training and Coaching. All coaches are not made the same nor are players, so you have this landscape full of different skilled players working with different levels of coaches. Pretty deep stuff in terms of variables and results. Naturally, a player who likes to train and is working with a very good coach, will have a stronger skill set then a player who does not like to train and is working with a coach that is limited…from there you can do all the variations of that and create a hierarchy of skilled players, which, by the way, does leave out the athletic ability of the player which would also play a huge role in the success.

Coaching matters, as does level of athlete and the desire of said athlete to train. These particular parts of the puzzle factor more into team success then most anything else. We’re actually seeing this principle play out with the New England Patriots over their dynasty run and their post Tom Brady era. Coach Belichick is one of the top coaches to do the job ever, and his greatest years were with Brady who was a player with talent and an incredible will to train and be disciplined. Since Brady’s departure, the level of player(s) and the willingness of players to train have rumored to be less then Brady by a considerable margin…so now the team isn’t good.

I’m down a rabbit hole, so let me bring it back. Coaching and player level and commitment matter. Taking a safeguard of the game off the rule book levels the playing field and allows teams that do not have the same talent or leadership to hang with teams that do. That’s not, in my opinion, what sports is about. We don’t make the game easier to allow teams and players to have an equitable feel. On the contrary, we want disparity as we want to reward merit, celebrate the underdog, and promote hard work. There is no better feeling when an underdog upsets a favorite! We remember those moments, clearly! Pats over Rams for the first super bowl win in New England…Princeton over UCLA in march madness…Red Sox over Yankees in 04, USA over the USSR in hockey in the Olympics, Buster Douglas knocking out Mike Tyson, Giants over the unbeaten Patriots in 08…I could go on and on. In each case, the favorite was considered ‘better’ by a long run and the upstart showed, handled the wave, and then knocked the favorite off. It doesn’t happen all the time, which is why we love it when it does, and we tune in as often as possible for the chance to catch it.

Also, having a team that is elite that you’re chasing is what drives you to be better. During my JWU years for men’s volleyball it was Rivier. For high school girls’ volleyball in Rhode Island, it’s North Kingstown High School. For the current boys’ season about to happen in the same state…it’s probably La Salle Academy. To knock a team off that doesn’t lose, you need to prep like mad, train harder than before, and put it all together when the lights are brightest. If you are the team that doesn’t lose, you have to train like mad to stay on top because everyone that sees you is going to give their best shot and will celebrate like they won the world league if they get you. Removing a rule that separates the cream from the crop and allows for more parity removes a piece of the competitive soul which waters down the product which ends with apathy toward the game.

Leaving coaches with less to complain about…well, that’s not going to happen. Why? Coaches will always have something to complain about. Net violations, bad hands (though if doubles were removed now, it’s how long the kid is holding onto the ball), out of rotation, jersey color…you name it, a coach will complain about it. When it comes to coaches screeching about things to the referee, in my mind you have two scenarios…you have the coach who is ultra-competitive, maybe out of line, and maybe slightly ignorant on the rules or decorum of the sport, and then you have the big-time college people (professional as well) where wins and losses are their career and job security. When too many loses means you get fired, you're screeching about everything. Only a select few get to be a volleyball coach for a living, so bet that those people are not looking to cash in their chips any time soon and will scratch and claw for every single victory. As for the other group, I mean, there are jerks everywhere in all aspects of life. They come in all shapes and sizes and they’re going to be there no matter what rules you make or remove. Take away doubles, they’ll be down your throat about rotations or clothing or lifts. It’s never going to just be smooth, because of the two types of coaches out there…and we’re not even talking about fans. Fans know very little and even in 2023 I’ve been yelled at as an official for letting a kid set normally because the fan was certain you weren’t allowed to contact the ball that way. I mean, he’s played picnic volleyball at a high level so he knows…

The truth of the matter is that it takes thick skin to be an official and one has to build that up by taking experience. I’ve heard people talk about creating a different persona while other just ooze confidence. I mean, there is a reason officials tend to be smug and its more than anything a defense mechanism. Can’t think of many jobs where you get yelled at every single time you walk into a building. It’s a hard gig, and then add that in today’s world almost everyone is afraid of conflict, which when it comes (and it always does), both parties feel somehow like it’s personal.

Quick story. I was coaching a match that was close and of a decent level, and the official called a lift on my attacking opposite. It was borderline in my opinion. Then he called the same violation on the same kid again couple rallies down the line after the opposition made a couple of plays that looked pretty similar to me to what my player did. Well, that when the official heard from me. “You cannot make that call. The other side is doing the exact same thing, yet you dinged my player twice without anything toward them. This is trash.” Now, he was not happy and threatened to card me, but did not…which by the way, told me I was right (they don’t card you when you’re right). What was astonishing was after the match, the official approached me and tried to dress me down. To him it was personal, to me it was work. He was adamant that I should not have addressed him so (he’s right, I’m supposed to talk to the down official, but that never does anything so almost all coaches direct their displeasure at the top ref). My point to him was a coach cannot let an official make questionable calls only against one particular player when others are doing the same. You want me to be quiet, be consistent and better. “But you called me trash, Coach…” “No, I said this situation was trash. I did not say you were trash.” “Well, I’ve been in the sport for 20+ years and I’ve never…” “Yeah, me too. I’ve coached at all three levels and have seen thousands of matches. It is what it is.”

To that official, what I had done was a personal attack. In my mind, I was defending my player and demanding that the official do a more consistent job. He can feel like I attacked him all he wants, but that’s the job and there was nothing I did there that was outside of the rules. If he felt I was out of line, he should have carded me which is the only recourse he had. He chose not too. However, he was wounded enough to address me after the fact. Ok, but he still did not address the fact that his level and the calls he made caused the issue. Maybe he was just done by that match. Maybe he had a terrible day prior. Maybe something really serious had happened in his life and it affected everything for him. I’ll never know, nor could I know at the moment it happened. Regardless, the game (quite frankly all games) requires their officiating to be tough, thick skinned, and knowledgeable. You take the whistle and start a game, know that coaches will be in competitive mode, fans will argue with bias toward their kid and team, and no one will be a fan of yours until the next day. That’s just what it is, and removing doubles from the rule book will change nothing.

More amazing rallies… There is sort of a rule on the books that helps that situation, already. The powers that be noticed about five or so years back (maybe more) that amazing rallies were ending due to bad hands from setters in the judgement of the officials. At the highest level of college volleyball, you’d have two teams just hammering the ball followed by incredible digs, only for the official to call a violation when the setter quasi mangles a ball trying to do something next level. So, the word came forth that officials were to swallow their whistles on an athletic play by the setter. Dubbed, in my head anyway, the Athletic Setter Rule. If the setter is attempting to make a play that is super athletic, then should he or she double the ball…let it go.

Now, I’m not the biggest fan of the rule, but it’s probably part of the genesis of where we are now. You have the same sort of quandary with consistency. What is an athletic play by the setter, just as with double, is subjective and varies for each official. Referee Tom might see a play as athletic while Referee Mary may not. So, we’ve not really done much here, however, to be fair, it has led to a slight uptick in continued rallies. Add, that should we remove the doubles violation with the “amazing rallies” idea behind it, then we’re basically creating another rule that is already on the books. Doubling up, as they say. Comically comparing this to say real law, where it’s illegal to murder someone, making a new law that says it’s illegal to stop someone from seeing the next day. Both are relatively the same, so why are we doing that?

Having rallies that are high level are cool and punctuate the beauty and skill of the sport, so certainly I’m for seeing that. However, I will say I’ve seen plenty of long rallies that are boring and not skilled. Terms like frustrating, and a pillow fight broke out, come to mind and those do not showcase the sport in a premium light. Point is, not all rallies in the game are the same and having longer rallies for the sake of just having long rallies isn’t automatically good. Sometimes that double that’s called is putting everyone out of their misery. It’s a safeguard for the quality of play, so let’s address that…

The Safeguards and Guard Rails of the Game: There are plenty of rules in volleyball. Most wouldn’t believe how many rules there are in volleyball, actually. I’ll also say that there are plenty of rules in the game that I think are superfluous and are often over the top that most officials, coaches, and players just ignore them (or at least modify for the sake of the room or contest). Those types of rules tend to be about proper clothing, undergarments for match play, how to substitute players, where players can stand when they’re not in the game, how many coaches can stand up, handing in the lineup, etc. I could go on and on. These rules are not safeguards of the actual game. To me, a safeguard of the game are rules for play that maintain the quality and integrity of the sport of volleyball. The one that jumps out first and is the easiest for an example is the carry, lift, or catch. You can’t catch the ball in this game. Full stop. Catching the ball, takes the volley out of volleyball and from there you’re playing a totally different sport. The quality of the game is protected by these types of rules and in my opinion, you can add doubles to the list. We want our game to be elite, skilled, and pleasing to watch. Double contact violation ensures that setters are trained well and can execute the skill at a competent level providing a guard rail to keep those items in place.

You have to read the room too. If we’re watching a game of eight-year-olds play the game, I would not want the official to call a double contact on the setter as it’s likely happening a lot. Volleyball ceases fun operations if we have a violation on every play. You want the players to sort the match out with spikes, serves, and strategy…not error after error after error. However, high school age is the time when those safeguard rules have to matter as players begin their climb into the college ranks and possibly beyond. Even at the high school level, officials are trained to set their standard based on the setters in the game for doubles. More then anything, all players and coaches want is consistency from the officials. So if it’s a double for the setter on Team X, it has to be a double when the setter from Team Y makes the same type of contact. If the room is two setters at the high school level that are at the beginning of their volleyball journey, set the bar low, but just be consistent with it.

Again, no question any league or body outside of the official high school, college, and professional leagues can make whatever rules they want. You don’t want to be the guy or gal at a family BBQ calling doubles on Aunt Tracey because doubles need to be called. Aunt Tracey will punch you. If you’re representing your school, or club, and you’re in high school and above, well yeah, those doubles need to be called to preserve the quality of the game.

Conclusion…

As I proofread this article (over and over again and always miss something…), I’ve written on the value of the double contact violation it dawns on me that perhaps the reason I did not want to get involved in that thread that started this in the first place is because I’ve got too much to say about it. No one wants to read that much on this topic. If you’ve made it this far, dear reader, God bless you. At the end of the day, it matters to me how the sport is governed and it’s mainly because I’ve spent so much of my life on it. Not to get too philosophical, but the most valuable thing we have is our time and what we spend it on. Volleyball is a huge part of my time spent pie graph and I guess I have to believe that those hours were not wasted.

Do double violations matter? Yes! Could you take them off the board? Yes, and people will still play volleyball and the world will keep on spinning. Making changes for the sake of change's sake, to me, however, is often an error as our old traditions, rules, and style of games have been crafted through time and what we’ve ended up with is the best way or most logical conclusion. Or maybe I can phrase that better. Making changes without significant debate and thought of the ramifications of said change is an error as perhaps we already have the peak of the game as it’s been tested through trial and error for 128 years.

So, this is my submission to the debate, thoughts, and ramifications of that change…and I thank you for reading it.

Coach Scott Reslow

Moravian College - Class of 1999

Head Coach for Boys and Girls Volleyball at East Greenwich High School (2006 - 2008)

Head Men’s Volleyball Coach for Johnson & Wales University (2009 - 2020)

Head Boys Volleyball Coach for South County 18 Blue (2021 - Current)