Jim McMath was having difficulties with his ISP and ask me to post
this followup. His point is a good one--stressing that red cards do
not carry any loss of rally. My posting added red card commentary in
the wrong place!
I was trying to post the following on rec.sport.volleyball as a reply
to your comment. I currently can not post for some reason. Would you
post it for me.
Be careful with your use of red and yellow cards in your reply. A red
card in FIVB/USAV is an expulsion and under both rulesets, no other
actions (i.e., loss of rally to other team and a point awarded) apply.
In looking at the cases, the original post used a yellow card for case
1 and a yellow and red card situations for case 2.
In case 2 under FIVB, the red card between games is proper because
individual sanctions accumulate. See FIVB Rule 22.3 Sanction
Scale. Under USAV, they do not, hence, the second referee would have
to judge the behavior as offensive conduct in order to request a an
explusion (Red Card) from the first referee. The USA would serve
first with a score of 0-0.
Not quite sure who wrote the response to the orgininal question, in
"1) Does this mean that Taliaferro will not be allowed to play at during
set 2, i.e. does the red card sanction carry through?"
The answer is yes, Taliaferro will not be allowed to play set 2 and must
remain in the designated penalty area for the set under FIVB rules.
"2) Set 2 will begin USA 0-1 Italy due to the red card. Italy served
first in set 1. Does 'loss of rally' mean the equivalent of a
side-out (in which case Italy serve first again), OR does mean a loss
of point (in which case USA serve first)?
Set 2 will start with USA serving, score 0-0. No other action is
taken against a team that has a player expelled for a set or
disqualified for a match. As what does "loss of rally" mean, it means
that the serve and a point are awarded to the other team. In this
case, if Taliferro had not received a penalty (yellow card) earlier in
Set 1, and received only a penalty for his comments between sets 1 and
2, then Set 2 would have started with the USA loosing the serve and
Italy receiving the serve and a point.
As I stated earlier under USAV rules, individual sanctions (except for
expulsions) do not accumulate in a match. So in case 2 under USAV
rules, if Taliferro received a yellow card in set (game) 1, then
received a yellow card between sets (games) 1 and 2, and his team was
scheduled to serve first in set (game) 2, then his team would loose
its first serve and his team's opponent would receive the serve and a
USA National Referee
PAVA State Referee
> > Particularly relevant to the FIVB rules regarding issuing of cards
> > under the new system. The rules state that issuing a yellow card
> > sanction penalises the side concerned with 'loss of rally'.
> As does USAV (where a yellow card is a loss of rally too)--or is there
> another FIVB change of which I'm unaware? My comments below refer to
> USAV rules.
> USAV indoor 2000-2001
> 24.3 The repetition of misconduct by the same team member in the same
> game is sanctioned progressively as shown in the misconduct
> sanction scale....
> 24.4. Misconduct before and between games.
> Any misconduct occuring before or between games is sanctioned
> according to rules 24.2. Sanctions apply at the beginning of
> the following game.
> > But consider the following cases (real names used to avoid common
> > team A/B confusion)...
> > Case 1
> > Score is USA 24-23 Russia. USA serve, Tom Hoff stuffs Kazakov straight
> > down to win the rally and then screams an expletive into his face to
> > ram the point home. He is shown a yellow card.
> Order of events is very important. _Assuming the ball was down before
> the expletive_, the USA wins the point for the blocked ball--nothing
> can change that. At that point, the end of game signal would be
> apprpropriate, once you deal with the inevitable protest that would be
> lodged by Russia attempting to get that that rally back. The protest
> would likely be denied based on the referee's judgement of the order
> of events. :-)
> > BUT what is the score? Is the interpretation:
> > 1) the rally ended as soon as the ball grounded on the block. USA win
> > the set 25-23. Hoff's yellow card is counted as loss of the first
> > rally in the next set, where USA will thus begin 0-1 behind.
> #1 here is correct to the best of my knowledge, all hinging on the
> order or events. As a technical nit, the referee should give the end
> of game signal before issuing the red card, though whistles to stop
> the conduct would be needed immediately. The red card would be
> recorded on the set 2 scoresheet, and the sanction applied there. If
> the USA had the serve for game 2, Russia would actually begin play one
> rotation ahead of what their lineup sheet would say for that game.
> > Case 2
> > Brandon Taliaferro receives a yellow card early in set 1 for disputing
> > a close line call with colourful language towards the down ref. Score
> > is USA 23-24 Italy, and Bernardi blazes a kill to give Italy the set.
> > As the teams change ends, Taliaferro again addresses the down ref with
> > abusive language, referring to the previous line call.
> Aside: what the heck does an R2 have to do with a line call? :-)
> > In line with the FIVB rules on repeated transgression, the up ref
> > shows Taliaferro the red card.
> The set is over, so if the red card is shown, it is applied to the
> following set, with #1 appropriate below, per 24.4.
> The official should take care regarding the scope of the progressive
> sanction scale, however. USAV indoor rule 24.3 states that the
> progressive sanction scale applies to repetition within a _game_. If
> the R1 applies a Red card to such an infraction, it would have to be
> judged "extremely offensive conduct," which could very well be the
> > Questions:
> > 1) Does this mean that Taliaferro will not be allowed to play at all
> > during set 2, i.e. does the red card sanction carry through?
> > 2) Set 2 will begin USA 0-1 Italy due to the red card. Italy served
> > first in set 1. Does 'loss of rally' mean the equivalent of a
> > side-out (in which case Italy serve first again), OR does it just mean
> > loss of a point (in which case USA serve first)?
> > Thanks for help. This came up a couple of times last season, and the
> > refs had no idea what to do...
> > Dr W
> Best Regards,